On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:33 PM, Wolfgang Bornath <[email protected]> wrote: > 2010/12/8 Hoyt Duff <[email protected]>: >> >> Since there were published guidelines and the guidelines were >> important and a community effort will attract many skilled people who >> are not familiar with "the way things are done", there should have >> been a more assertive effort to remediate their submissions earlier in >> the process. In this way, more people learn "the way things are done" >> and more ideas are available to consider and, ultimately, a better >> educated community is better for all of us. > > I remember your previous comments and I re-state my opinion that the > guidelines were published and mentioned more than enough on each and > every plattform there is. But certainly re-stating does not mean > improving. So, how do you propose to improve the process to achieve > what you want? > > I am sure you don't want somebody watch all the incoming suggestions > (470 for the logo) and reply to each one with a hint to the guidelines > (not counting following discussions with the artist about those > guidelines). > I don't know if there is some feature in Flickr which replies with a > customizable text to each upload. That's the only way I could think > of. > > -- > wobo >
No need to do anything to the initial submissions. At (or just prior to) the first cut of the list, the submitters who did not adhere to the guidelines and deserve further consideration should be pointed to the guidelines (which should include an explanation of why the guidelines are important) and asked to re-submit within a time-frame, then omit the submitters who don't care to do the work to participate further. This allows everyone to participate initially, but also encourages everybody to eventually follow the guidelines. It exposes the community to all ideas while educating about the community and supporting the administrators of the particular project at the end. -- Hoyt
