On Wed, November 14, 2012 2:28 pm, meg ford wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Sriram Ramkrishna > <s...@ramkrishna.me>wrote: > >> The wrong idea of course is that people think we're just removing >> features >> for no apparent reason even though for instance fallback mode was never >> guarantee. We need to correct those misconceptions. >> >> Having a good relationship with the general public is more important now >> than it was in the past thanks to social media. For example, with >> Ubuntu >> (who holds the largest share of users right now), GNOME is no longer the >> default and so it takes a conscious effort to change to GNOME. If they >> do >> the research, I don't want them to see a pile of ridiculous blog >> postings >> that aren't challenged by calm and simple rhetoric. >> >> Regarding, Emily's post. You need to look at the overall message there. >> Not everyone is on the same page, and the fact that we are having this >> discussion with other people who clearly have the same concerns is >> indicative that we do have a problem. If you think there is no problem, >> we >> an drop this whole thing. >> >> Community enthusiasts won't go out there using the 'royal we' without >> some >> training. This stuff isn't easy, and it is important that our >> volunteers >> understand how to engage in both the GNOME community and the community >> at >> large. They will need training on GNOME's vision and purpose. That >> means, >> release team, designers, and relevant parties will need to help these >> volunteers in understanding it before going out there and speaking in >> our >> name. I'm having Karen be in charge of us. >> > > I'd like to request that Karen also provide the members of the board with > the information she shares with the volunteers. It's demoralizing to see > members of the board arguing about GNOME's vision and purpose. If we are > going to present a positive image of ourselves to the public, I think we > need to at least have the board members agreeing on the basic message. I > hope this doesn't offend anyone; I'm just saying this because, as a member > of the foundation, I would really appreciate it if the board members could > present a united front.
Great point, Meg. I think the board should definitely be involved in this process, as they are our elected representatives. I of course commit to doing everything I can to help make that happen. In any event, I agree with you that a coordinated basic message (with flexibility for individual perspectives) should be of the utmost importance. I'm glad we're undertaking this effort - I hope it will help drive us to be more coordinated all around. karen > Meg Ford > >> >> The end goal is to reduce the signal to noise ratio and get real >> feedback >> without hyperbole and let developers and designers be able to produce >> awesome stuff without feeling buried in undue negativity. The only >> thing I >> ask in return is that you consider the feedback that is being provided >> to >> you. If the feedback is negative, help us engage with the community >> with >> the right approach. If the feedback is positive, then I hope you will >> take >> that as encourage and motivation to keep doing it. >> >> sri >> >> >> >> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 2:38 AM, Bastien Nocera <had...@hadess.net> >> wrote: >> >>> Hey Sri, >>> >>> On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 16:07 -0800, Sriram Ramkrishna wrote: >>> > >>> > I'm looking for some charismatic, happy GNOME folks who can help >>> > engage with our community. >>> > >>> > We've had a bad run of late with a lot of folks getting the wrong >>> idea >>> > of what we're trying to do. >>> >>> Which is? >>> >>> > I'm looking for some talented folks who can help us engage with the >>> > press, on blogs, on mailing lists and explain our vision. >>> >>> I hope it's slightly better handled than Emily last 2 posts, which >>> managed to say that the removal of fallback was badly communicated (!) >>> without details of what was done wrong, and used a blog post by a troll >>> to make false assertions about GTK+ 3.x's API stability. >>> >>> You might want to vouch for your community managers before you let them >>> loose... >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> foundation-list mailing list >> foundation-list@gnome.org >> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list >> >> > _______________________________________________ > foundation-list mailing list > foundation-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list > _______________________________________________ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list