On Jul 10, 2014 12:42 PM, "David Gerard" <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 10 July 2014 19:23, Isarra Yos <zhorishna(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/07/14 18:01, David Gerard wrote:
> OTOH, typical mind fallacy is rampant
everywhere and the results of an
> actual decent user survey would probably surprise everyone.
> That was kind of my point - as much as editors do tend deal more
directly
> with the readers, we've basically got two
(rather biased) sides who both
> think they know what readers want and thus try to speak for them. This
may
> not even be an issue, by itself, but
unfortunately it's becoming a
rather
> common tactic among some WMF staff to simply
dismiss community feedback
> saying things like that the editors simply don't speak for the readers.
But
> if this is really the case, what gives the WMF
the right to speak for
the
readers
either?
Personally I'm getting rather tired of this.
I concur that there's a bit much reasoning from no data, and we could
do with some.
Anecdotally, (a) I don't mind the new viewer (b) I know a lot of
people who've said they love it (c) I know a few who've said they hate
it. So yeah, real user surveys needed!
- d.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
I agree that's sorely needed. We would need a few things to ensure it would
work:
--A neutral question. "Do you prefer A or B for...?". Half the takers get
the new stuff as A, half get the old. No front loading of the results.
--No self selection of participants. That's not easy but is necessary.
People who take the time to self select may be more likely to perceive a
problem.
--Getting real feedback and actually analyzing it. Why did people like A or
B? Is it for reasons that make sense to default it for logged in editors as
well as casual readers? A lot of friction could be reduced if editors'
workflows were not unexpectedly disrupted.
--Publishing full (anonymized) results (not a summary only) and
methodologies prominently.
If we can do that, I'm all for the survey. Otherwise, it's useless.