Good point Matt, I'd like to cross things and would prefer to keep each email with a single CTA (call to action). I'll take a pass to see if I can accomplish two in one.
On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 13:28, Matt Sicker <[email protected]> wrote: > Emailing committers@ with a note in the email to ask PMCs to pass > along the survey to their own communities would get it all done in one > email. > > On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 11:49, Patricia Shanahan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > If I am going to get more than one e-mail that is essentially on the > > same subject, I would greatly prefer them to be completely and obviously > > identical. That way, I can quickly trash all except one, and tell > > Thunderbird they are junk so I won't see any that show up later. > > > > If you space them out and vary them enough that Thunderbird does not > > recognize them as duplicates of the first message they will waste more > > of my time. If I were not already interested in diversity, that would > > make me less likely to complete the survey. > > > > > > On 10/29/2019 9:10 AM, Gris Cuevas wrote: > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > We are just planning to send two emails, one to committers@ and one > to members@ with a link to the survey. I will write these emails to be > different so it doesn't feel like a repetition. I will also space them, so > people who receive both see the second one as a reminder, and not spam. > > > > > > In these emails I will ask PMCs to voluntarily share the link of the > survey in their user@ and dev@ lists if they wish. > > > > > > I'm also going to ask to some projects for support directly. > > > > > > The key here is that the messages will be different and spaced, so > they serve as reminders and don't feel spammy. > > > > > > G > > > > > > On 2019/10/29 11:03:52, "Kevin A. McGrail" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> Definitely should not be sending to private emails. > > >> > > >> What we need is to simply use survey software and load in all > apache.org > > >> email addresses from an export. > > >> > > >> This is an official ASF project and as such is not spam. Then email > > >> directly. No use of lists at all. > > >> > > >> And ask all pmcs to promote it and request others who are not formally > > >> committers to submit. > > >> > > >> Regards, KAM > > >> > > >> On Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 03:03 Daniel Gruno <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> > > >>> I would favor sending emails to the various dev@ and users@ lists > over > > >>> trying to gather the private email addresses of people, which is > quite > > >>> outside the remit of D&I. Those addresses can be obtained on an > opt-in > > >>> basis for later surveys. I'd much rather we live with a couple of > > >>> duplicated messages for those subscribes to a lot of lists than using > > >>> PII we have no right to grab. > > >>> > > >>> On 10/29/19 3:51 AM, Kenneth Knowles wrote: > > >>>> I will show my ignorance of email here... > > >>>> > > >>>> When I receive the same email via a collection of mailing lists, my > email > > >>>> client (GMail) deduplicates them and shows me a single message. > This is > > >>>> actually a source of confusion when the lists have different levels > of > > >>>> privilege/privacy... > > >>>> > > >>>> So if we do a first round to collect which lists PMCs approve and > then > > >>> send > > >>>> a single email to all lists, will that not work? I truly do not > know the > > >>>> answer to this question. > > >>>> > > >>>> I do think we should avoid direct-to-person emails. > > >>>> > > >>>> Kenn > > >>>> > > >>>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 7:25 PM Austin Bennett < > > >>> [email protected]> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Patricia, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> That seems a straight forward infra/other issue. Naively, seems > someone > > >>>>> could iterate through all the relevant lists and then deduplicate > emails > > >>>>> (wouldn't catch all - in instance that you have different email > > >>> addresses > > >>>>> in different lists -- but probably would reduce lots of duplicate > > >>>>> messaging). Though, invites the question if direct messages might > get > > >>>>> caught by spam while messages to specific lists wouldn't. I would > be > > >>> happy > > >>>>> to do this for the sake of reducing email to many, should it be > deemed > > >>> the > > >>>>> sensible solution and granted the needed access to do so. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Cheers, > > >>>>> Austin > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 4:10 PM Patricia Shanahan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> One danger that I don't know how to solve: In trying to reach as > many > > >>>>>> people as possible you will bombard many of us with multiple > e-mails. I > > >>>>>> am subscribed to [email protected], members@, committers@, two > PMC > > >>>>>> private lists, and the corresponding dev@lists. I'm going to get > > >>> about 7 > > >>>>>> copies, and some people are subscribed to a lot more than 2 > projects. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> On 10/28/2019 3:49 PM, Griselda Cuevas wrote: > > >>>>>>> Hi folks, > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> I'm back from my leave and ramping up on this project. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> First of all, I want to say THANK YOU Katia for stepping in and > > >>> helping > > >>>>>>> move the project forward with very little friction. To be a new > > >>>>>> contributor > > >>>>>>> to our community you have helped us achieve tremendous progress. > Also > > >>>>>> thank > > >>>>>>> you Justin for supporting Katia and providing her with advice. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> I want to also thank everyone who has contributed with feedback, > > >>>>> advice, > > >>>>>>> revisions and support. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> I caught up with Katia and we decided on the following path > forward: > > >>>>>>> 1) Draft emails as per Sally's suggestions in this thread > > >>>>>>> 2) Partner with Sally to send final message with survey to > members@ & > > >>>>>>> committers@ > > >>>>>>> 3) Promote survey in social media and other channels to capture > > >>>>>>> non-committer participation (draft from ideas shared in this > thread) > > >>>>>>> 4) Run survey for 1 month after initial publication > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> I will also be following up with the working group and Bitergia > to > > >>>>> catch > > >>>>>> up > > >>>>>>> with the rest of the project. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Cheers, > > >>>>>>> G > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 14:47, Kenneth Knowles <[email protected]> > > >>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Not sure if there was followup that makes this email obsolete. > If so, > > >>>>>>>> apologies. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Both Justin & Shane have proposed ways for the survey to reach a > > >>> wider > > >>>>>>>> audience than committers@. I think both of their ideas avoid > any > > >>>>>>>> unsolicited email. I think expanded reach is very important. > For the > > >>>>>>>> survey* results I presented at ApacheCon NA, inclusion of > > >>>>> non-committers > > >>>>>>>> was key to many insights. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> What do you think of their ideas? Any other ideas? > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Kenn > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> *survey of people at Google who self-identified as using or > > >>>>>> contributing to > > >>>>>>>> ASF projects > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> -- > > >>>>>> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > > >>>>>> https://www.avg.com > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > -- > Matt Sicker <[email protected]> >
