Group application standardization

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Paul W. Frields <stickster at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 08:00:32PM -0400, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 03:03:59PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
>> > On Thursday 15 April 2010 02:37:29 pm Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>> > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath at redhat.com> wrote:
>> > > > On Thu, 15 Apr 2010, Matt Domsch wrote:
>> > > >> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 9:01 AM, Tom "spot" Callaway
>> > > >>
>> > > >> <tcallawa at redhat.com> wrote:
>> > > >> > On 04/15/2010 11:56 AM, Mike McGrath wrote:
>> > > >> >> We've got a group called "disabled_torrent" the rules for application
>> > > >> >> are "Do NOT apply for this group.  It is a disabled group.  Why
>> > > >> >> would you apply for this group?"...  People have applied for this
>> > > >> >> group.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > I suspect most of those folks do not read English.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> or they're bot signups...
>> > > >
>> > > > FWIW, at least some of them were actual people who told me they weren't
>> > > > sure why they signed up for group X.  Mind boggling :)
>> > >
>> > > It is probably a similar subset of the people who want install everything.
>> > >
>> > > When I went through the groups lists there were so many choices I just
>> > > decided to mass submit for some pages as it was easier to have someone
>> > > tell me "Hey you didn't want to do that." versus find out later I
>> > > needed to apply for a group if I wanted to do something.  I am
>> > > guessing it is another example of the too many choices problem: while
>> > > some people can't make any decision from the multitude there are..
>> > > some people have found it more useful to just choose everything to see
>> > > what happens.
>> >
>> >
>> > Maybe we need some kind of abstraction layer with a wizard,
>> >
>> > that asks some questions on where you would like to contribute. and recommends
>> > groups.
>> >
>> > i.e. im from brasil and want to translate i get offered the general translation
>> > group and the pt_BR one
>> >
>> ... but in general signing up for a group in FAS is the last step of
>> beconming part of a Fedora group.  Which is confusing since signing up for
>> an account and signing the CLA are some of the first things that our
>> announcements have people do.  We need to send people to start communicating
>> with groups right after they sign the CLA (or as a TODO list item in FAS or
>> something) rather than let them explore the FAS interface looking for
>> a group to sign up for.
>>
>> Or we need to change what the groups do so that people really do find that
>> signing up for a group gets them communicating to the groups that can use
>> their help.
>
> These are both really good points.  I know there are myriad ways to
> attack the problem.  Would it be a good starting point, while we
> discuss something better, to have a notice after CLA signup directing
> users to a page of "join a team" links?  (That page might exist on the
> wiki for easier editing.)
>
> The second alternative sounds equally good.  If I read you right, some
> groups might then be categorized as something other than "tracking,"
> and be linked to somewhere the user is presented with the next logical
> step in the process of working with the desired group.
>

I would say the first thing to do is draw a set of pictures of what
people think a signup and joining would look like.

And if it ends up looking like  a little blue hat that appears in the
corner and says "I see you are new to Fedora. Would you like some help
joining groups?" we know we need help from some professionals.


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.

Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp. Or what's a heaven for?
-- Robert Browning