Hi, On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 11:40, Allan Day <allanp...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sriram Ramkrishna <s...@ramkrishna.me> wrote: >> We've been getting a slew of psots on G+ and in the press. Started by >> Linus, has now caused a stampede of well known Linux kernel developers >> feeling the need to reject Gnome 3 in public. >> >> Since the press now senses red meat, I wonder if we might be ready with >> canned messages if at the Desktop Summit we are approached to comment on >> Linus and other's rants against Gnome 3? > > The main thing is to set out our positive story rather than to tackle > the negativity head on. There's a standard line that goes something > like: > > 1. GNOME 3 was a change, there were always going to be some people who > didn't like it. > 2. But it has been a huge success. <Insert evidence: > - We've been regularly contacted by people telling us how much they like it. > - There have been good reviews in the press. > - Fedora received a massive boost in popularity due to including it. > - We've subsequently seen other major OSs following the same design > trajectories - FOSS leading rather than following for once.> > 3. But we know there's more to do. 3.0 was the first step; it will get > better and better with subsequent releases. > > The most damaging thing that's been said so far - which we need to > counter where possible - is the suggestion that no one likes GNOME 3. > That's a really nasty meme. A straight statement along the lines of 'X > is entitled to his/her opinion, but it goes against the reality that > GNOME 3.0 was hugely successful for that kind of release' is needed.
I don't really like these canned answers. So one says "G3 is an unholy mess" the other one says "G3 is hugely successful". It sounds to me like "keep talking, I don't listen". It's like a discussion between two death persons. It is perfectly fair to say "G3 is bad" without any argument, it's freedom of speech. The answers of GNOME people I could read were not fair. (We could wonder why GNOME people are so sensitive on the subject.) What about? - be open - listen to the feedback, - don't give canned answers - engage in constructive discussion, - avoid derision - show interest in feedback - get to the facts; - go to the source, tackle rumors; what is it founded on? - if needed, go through a few levels of "why" to reach the point - use numbers - avoid vague quantities "so many", "a lot", "several", etc. - encourage people to report more formal feedback (mailing list, buzilla, wiki) - really, listen to the feedback I did not see much of this in the "unholy threads" mentioned above, sadly. -- marketing-list mailing list marketing-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing-list