1 |
On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 09:27 +0200, Wernfried Haas wrote: |
2 |
> On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 04:28:36AM +0100, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: |
3 |
> > I would like to ask that the Council discuss the current state and |
4 |
> > future of the GWN at their next meeting. |
5 |
> |
6 |
> Council? Why escalate things? Have you talked to Ulrich about the |
7 |
> problems mentioned below? Isn't the GWN somehow a userrel issue? ;-) |
8 |
|
9 |
I have attempted, but as it happens I have never ever spoken to Ulrich |
10 |
as he does not respond to my e-mails and does not frequent IRC and I |
11 |
don't have his telephone number or address. And the GWN doesn't come |
12 |
under Userrel, although they do have a representative within Userrel, |
13 |
one whom I understand to be wanting to make some improvements to the |
14 |
GWN. |
15 |
|
16 |
As for why the Council, because thats what people suggested when I asked |
17 |
which route to take when he was unresponsive. |
18 |
|
19 |
> > 1. Reliability. The GWN claims to be a weekly publication, yet it |
20 |
> > frequently fails to publish without prior warning. There was no edition |
21 |
> > this week, and Patrick Lauer says that it is "unknown" whether there |
22 |
> > will be an edition next week as Ulrich Plate is AWOL. |
23 |
> |
24 |
> I agree there are problems due to Ulrich being awol every now and |
25 |
> then, but what can the council do about it? Fire him so the GWN is |
26 |
> unmaintained? ;-) |
27 |
|
28 |
No. I don't want anyone fired. However, I believe that the other GWN guy |
29 |
could be provided with sufficient access to make sure it goes out, and I |
30 |
believe that Ulrich could give some warning when possible so that |
31 |
Patrick or whomever can get it out regardless of whether Ulrich is |
32 |
around or not. |
33 |
|
34 |
> > 2. Permissions. Although it could be considered flattering that the GWN |
35 |
> > should choose a developer's blog as inspiration for an article, they |
36 |
> > should ensure that they have the developer / author's permission before |
37 |
> > quoting them (see previous complaints by brix, ciaranm and others). |
38 |
> |
39 |
> Why? What makes blog posts different to mailing list/forum threads, |
40 |
> new versions being released etc? Do you want to ask people for |
41 |
> permission then, too? |
42 |
|
43 |
If you re-read what I said I don't have an issue with the GWN or anyone |
44 |
else using someones blog post as inspiration, I do however believe that |
45 |
when quoting someone and writing the article in such a way that the |
46 |
'quotee' appears to have spoken to the publication you need to get some |
47 |
consensus before printing. |
48 |
|
49 |
> > I also believe that when posting an article or interview, a copy should |
50 |
> > be sent to the relevant people to ensure that they are ok with what is |
51 |
> > being posted (my dev of the week interview, for example, was rather |
52 |
> > screwed up and misrepresentative). When someone contacts GWN to have |
53 |
> > something corrected, it would be appreciated were the GWN staff to at |
54 |
> > least deign to acknowledge receipt, even if for some reason they choose |
55 |
> > not to honour the corrections or post a retraction (although refusing to |
56 |
> > publish corrections is extremely insulting to those wronged). |
57 |
> |
58 |
> Considering Ulrich is appearently still/again awol, could that be the |
59 |
> reason? I have requested small fixes (like wrong email addresses in |
60 |
> stuff i submitted) every now and than and got what i asked for. |
61 |
|
62 |
He wasn't awol at the time of my writing my first few e-mails. |
63 |
|
64 |
> > 3. Misinformation, misquotations and outright fabrications. Sure, |
65 |
> > there's freedom of the press, but that shouldn't be used as an excuse |
66 |
> > for deliberately making up quotes and printing intentional |
67 |
> > misinformation. |
68 |
> |
69 |
> Huh? Can you back that statement up? |
70 |
|
71 |
To take an example, there were made up quotes in my GWN interview, |
72 |
however, nothing of great harm. I believe that time it was a case of |
73 |
attempting to make it more fun, it is however a worrying trend. |
74 |
|
75 |
> > From a PR perspective, Gentoo could benefit greatly by better |
76 |
> > utilisation of the GWN. I believe that as it stands, however, the GWN is |
77 |
> > discouraging people from contributing and damaging Gentoo's credibility. |
78 |
> |
79 |
> I have submitted a bunch of articles to the GWN, and it has always |
80 |
> worked fine for me. Yes, Ulrich is awol at times and sometimes there |
81 |
> are smaller corrections to make in the final article, but i never felt |
82 |
> discouraged to submit my stuff. Worst case it takes a few extra days |
83 |
> to get published. |
84 |
|
85 |
Ok. I am very glad to hear that not everyone shares the same experiences |
86 |
when it comes to contributing to the GWN. |
87 |
|
88 |
> > Another thing that concerns me is the way the articles are written. It |
89 |
> > is blatanly obvious that the GWN writers are not native English speakers |
90 |
> > as both the grammar and the flow of the articles is far from attractive. |
91 |
> > Having read through the archives, I notice that there was once a time |
92 |
> > when the GWN was a great publication, and I would like to think that it |
93 |
> > could become great yet again; in its current state, though, it is doing |
94 |
> > more harm than good. |
95 |
> |
96 |
> I disagree. GWN could use some more manpower to improve this and that, |
97 |
> but i don't see the harm - at least i could easily come up with lots |
98 |
> of stuff happening that does more harm (Not pointing my finger at |
99 |
> anyone and leaving it up to everyone's imagination to think of |
100 |
> something that does damage Gentoo in a terrible way). |
101 |
|
102 |
Yes, I agree they could use more manpower. They do however claim that |
103 |
they find it difficult to find someone to help and that is my motivation |
104 |
for bringing up the issues I notice. If the GWN themselves can't find a |
105 |
solution to the problem then I believe that the rest of us can attempt |
106 |
to help them find one. |
107 |
|
108 |
> > Lack of content and poorly written or incorrect articles are often |
109 |
> > justified by the GWN team on grounds of overwork and insufficient |
110 |
> > manpower. When I asked why they were not recruiting, I was informed that |
111 |
> > no-one has any interest in contributing. Upon speaking with others, |
112 |
> > however, I find that this is not the case -- people are interested, but |
113 |
> > fear (and rightly so) that their work will be edited in such a way that |
114 |
> > it is no longer something with which they want to be associated. |
115 |
> |
116 |
> I'm sure a solution can be found to that problem - actually Ulrich is |
117 |
> quite a nice guy to talk to, so if those people came out of hiding |
118 |
> those problems may be solved by talking. |
119 |
|
120 |
I wouldn't know, as I said he doesn't reply to my e-mails. OTOH, I have |
121 |
no reason to believe that he is not a nice guy to talk to. |
122 |
|
123 |
> > Another complaint is that the GWN rejects any writing style which has |
124 |
> > any degree of character or levity. Any attempt at dececnt writing (the |
125 |
> > kind that would make it into publication in English newspapers or |
126 |
> > magazines, for example), is met with the claim that "the GWN is not a |
127 |
> > humorous publication". |
128 |
> |
129 |
> http://www.gentoo.org/news/en/gwn/20060522-newsletter.xml#doc_chap3 |
130 |
> Look at the picture and tell me it's not at least a tiny bit |
131 |
> humorous. Agreed, the joke is a bit obvious. |
132 |
|
133 |
I can't quite see how your picture has anything to do with writing style |
134 |
and character of writing. |
135 |
|
136 |
> > I would like to see discussion about the way the GWN is |
137 |
> > (mis)representing Gentoo, how we can better actualise its full potential |
138 |
> > and what can be done to address the concerns listed above. |
139 |
> |
140 |
> I'm still not sure why the council should discuss the issue in the |
141 |
> first place, i think everyone agrees that the GWN is a bit |
142 |
> understaffed (for whatever reason) and some stuff doesn't work too |
143 |
> well. So i assume helping out with the GWN and helping those who fear |
144 |
> it for some reason may be the best way to solve these problems. |
145 |
|
146 |
I am not entirely sure why the council wouldn't be a good place to start |
147 |
a discussion about this. I believe that the council members will wish to |
148 |
help the GWN help themselves sufficiently to solve their problems, |
149 |
whether that be attempting to help them think of new ways to attract |
150 |
contributors or make any other changes. |