Coordination in social networks

[Arnav Kalra]

Distrowatch collects all this stuff automatically. Maybe we can just link
to it.



> I am the person who did it for multiple releases. It eventually got to
> the point where it was too low of a priority for me to do, when I had
> multiple jobs (FPL, program manager).
>
> My main gripes with this are:
>
> * OMG, pain in the butt. Seriously.  Wiki tables aren't awesome fun;
> we are collecting the title, the link, the author, the date (not the
> date it posted to the list, but the publication date), the language.
> That's a lot of back and forth between multiple windows of cut and
> pasting.  Not to sound like a wuss, but when I did these in batches,
> it would normally take me a number of hours to go through 10-20 posts.
>
> * Return on investment. We collect the articles .... and ??? We never
> did follow-up, except for the instances where someone would say
> something horribly wrong or incorrect in an article and someone would
> generally reach out to the author and try to correct them.  Ideally,
> we'd take the list of people and make sure they were all on a press
> list for release time, or do something like count the number of news
> postings we'd get on a release day, and use that as a benchmark for
> the next release to measure if we were getting more press, less press,
> etc.  Or identify reasons/causes of attracting press attention,
> outside of releases, and fine-tune our outreach. But we don't do
> anything right now, except still the occasional "correct the author's
> misinformation" type of thing, so going through and manually
> collecting things is hard.
>
> In my dream universe, I've always wanted to see a simple web tool
> where someone - instead of cutting/pasting into an email - could
> cut/paste into a small web app where they could put the title, date,
> author, etc. and then it would automagically post that in pretty table
> format to a wiki.  Encouraging people to do the wiki entry on their
> own when doing an in-the-news posting to the mailing list didn't yield
> many results, and making it a requirement I suspect would just cut
> down on the number of notifications we receive.  I am a fan of dead
> simple and this, while sort of dead simple, assuming you know how to
> use wiki tables, still sucks in terms of time/window swapping/omg i
> forgot the extra bracket and it hosed my whole page/omg i closed the
> window accidentally after entering 4 articles (though this is far less
> of a problem now with the reopen closed tab thing, but when that
> wasn't around, omg, I wanted to stab little kittens when I did that).
>
> One other thing to consider is that nowadays, there's a fine line
> between "news by people who write news articles for news sites" and
> "random blog posts/reviews of Fedora on personal blogs" - we often mix
> both of these into this list, and though sometimes they'll qualify as
> both, or someone's blog post will be so controversial it is news in
> and of itself... I don't really consider the latter to be a "news"
> type of thing, though perhaps the collection of reviews on its own
> might merit some sort of other scrutiny.  I could definitely see
> someone going through non-news blog reviews and doing a round-up of
> the most common review points/feedback/perceptions that we are seeing
> from people, and seeing if there was a way to pass that feedback along
> somehow (to fesco, or I don't know who.)
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/marketing/attachments/20120829/1c214c53/attachment.html>