[ComProj] Mixing Directories and Comms Tools

Wed Dec 5 17:17:05 UTC 2007

Dear Cary, Sean,

This is a continuation of our correspondence, which started in reply to
Sean's hard work in reorg the the Comms Proj page, and continued in Cary's
reply on 23/11/2007 titled ComProj Digest, Vol 9, Issue 12. I'm giving this
background as no one who might be reading this thread would understand this.
Which makes my point. Email might be OK for 1 to 1 communication. It's lousy
for anyone trying to get orientated.

The reason forums have proved so popular over the past few years is not
(just) that it enables people to communicate. The rule of thumb is for every
conversation there are 10 reading and 100 who use a thread for reference to
other conversations.

So if Sandy invites people to participate in a blogging initiative and then,
as Cary suggests, forgets, an enthusiastic volunteer isn't left feeling they
have been ignored. And if the logs for meetings aren't put up, they aren't
left feeling that things have come to a full stop. Fourums work because
conversations aren't split into monthly 'directories' and separated lists
which together discuss things which give people an overview of what's going
on, and discussions which overlap, without requiring editors who must answer
FAQ's continually, and readers attempting to understand the recategorization
merry-go-round.

As Sean (I think) said, "The problem is, we are not sure as to what we will
continue to do or if anything will be changed.  We seem to be adjusting the
group". This is a continuous (Comms Proj) process, in which the Foundation
would obviously like to see more people involved, but if they are like me,
they will see no place in which to start. 

I'm staggered by how much you guys, especially cary, have done with so few
people, so please don't take any of this as personal criticism. But as you
say Cary, most groups will want their own space, where outsiders must get
orientated and learn the lingo before contributing. But if this group can't
help them get an overview of the orgs structure then it's pretty obvious why
it's not going anywhere. 

I have pointed to just one domain's forums, which I have done before, and
which you might be aware of, if there was a thread which contained
discussion, going back years, about comms tools. It's this one
http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/

There's nothing clever about it, It's just seems to be the right tool for
the right job. Where a wiki is excellent for building a library of articles
and giving them a context (like Wikipedia), this kind of tool is excellent
for giving groups a chance to talk through an article's meaning, what it's
to be used for, link to & from reflated articles, and leave the memory of a
discussion behind. It also enables people to see who's reading a thread, tap
them on the shoulder and have a discussion about something at the time it
holds their interest (perhaps using VoIP services like Skype). 

The other stuff, the real time stuff, like IRC has come an aweful long way
since IRC. I'll point you at the big daddy - the accessgrid
http://www.accessgrid.org/ - which could be used for (as I've suggested)
tying together the Alexandrian Wikimania site with the runners up in
different countries. There are many other (smaller) versions of these
virtual rooms scattered around, but will require sponsorship. I'll talk to
Sue about that. (I was hoping it would be on this thread). 

Enough. Xmas is coming, and you don't need an old fart telling you how
things could be improved. It needs money to do all these things. I'm putting
something together for Sue which works through how NREN's could be
encouraged to host the Foundation's projects. I just wanted to stick this
post in the sand as I do, so you could edit it mercilessly. 

All the best,
simonfj 

ref; http://web.nmc.org/communication/section/questions/#0

> Sean,
> This is why I'm entirely disorientated,
>
> Off the front page http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page
> I click on Comms Projects Group http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ComProj
>
> Where I click on Projects.
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communication_Projects_Group/Projects
> And get nothing.

I think the list of projects was blanked because we are unsure as to
which projects are active or not.

> I'm sure you want newbies to go here.
>
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Communication_Projects_Group_-_Proje
cts

Actually, I don't think we want them to go there, that's the old
system that currently just lists all projects we've ever handled.
That category system may change at a later date.

> And the same can be said for the other links. No?

As far as I know, all of the other links in the Navbar are up-to-date as
well.

------------------------------

On 11/22/07, simonpedia <simon at cols.com.au> wrote:
> Dear Sean,
>
> My thanks for your guidance and patience, and my apologees for taking so
> long. So far as email allowing 'really clear comms'. If it were 121 yeah
OK.
> But we are trying to help idiots like me get ORIENTATED and after doing
so,
> be a little useful. After going through the many singular (open) elists,
> I've gotta say no, it's as clear as mud.

The problem is, we are not sure as to what we will continue to do or
if anything will be changed.  We seem to be adjusting the group.

> I look at Cormac (as one example) helping to orientate people on the uni
> list
>
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikiversity-l/2007-November/000247.html
> And then ask some real pertinent questions
>
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikiversity-l/2007-November/000248.html
>
> And then I look though (just) this list where I see Sandy Ordenez ask for
> some help with a blogging project, send a "yes, I'd love to help", and
> receive an email to a group, including yourself  that talks about another
> 'internal group'. (" Another Wikipedian - Simon has agreed to help out
with
> the edit wikipedia/blogging project. Schiste, when you can give me an
> update, so I can email to internal/comcom etc.)

That was just a message to Schiste about a few private groups.  In an
organization as large as ours, you must know that there are some
items/groups that won't be open to all.

> And then nothing.

About your edit wikipedia/blogging project?  If so, you should contact
Sandy about that, she probably just forgot.

> No doubt
> there are a thousand emails going on, which might make it clear what's
> happening. And the IRC meeting take place, without the records being
> (easily) found, and if they are, are so arcane, a newbie would have a hard
> time making some sense of them.

...the records are found in the navbar at the top of our ComProj
pages, click "Meetings".  I do admit that there hasn't been logs from
the last few meetings posted (and don't have an explanation for that),
but all the other logs are posted in the normal format for IRC chat
logs.

> Through all of this, I see the Foundation looking to employ more staff in
> San Fran to do with outreach & partnership development. Meanwhile
christophe
> doesn't understand how my mail might even pertain to this list.

Your e-mail might have been hard to figure out.

> OK, 'grumpy old man' is a good description. But I see you (and so many
> tothers) working your butt off, and while a wiki has proved quite
fantastic
> in developing an encyclopedia/dictionary that has changed every
> institution's idea of what the web could be for, it's global communities
are
> hindered by using comms tools built for an age gone by.
>
> Come on mate. You don't need to be told this by an old man. I've read too
> much of what you've (and others) have written to imagine what you could do
> by using comms tools that were modern. All I'm saying is that if you (and
> the bright minds around here) can scope them, we can surely find a partner
> who will sponsor them.

What "comms tools" are old-age?  Mailing lists?  They've seemed to
work fine for all of us and most people seem to agree that they're
better than other tools like forums.  However, if your "modern comms
tools" might be something like teleconferences, I'm sure that Sandy
would be happy to hear about that. :-)  Though, I'm not sure how
others would take it.  Instead of just saying that our communication
tools are antiquted, can you tell us some alternatives so we can
adequately discuss this?

> My regards to all,
> simonfj

and my regards to you.
>
>
>
> ComProj has long been a redirect to Communication Projects Group, so
> that hasn't changed. The projects page is what I changed the most; go
> take a look.
>
> As for forums etc., I understand where you are coming from, but I also
> don't see what is wrong with e-mail - surely pretty much everyone on
> the web knows how to use e-mail, and it allows really clear
> communication?
>
> Thank you for your contribution,
>
> Sean
>
>
>
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.1/1140 - Release Date:
19/11/2007
> 7:05 PM
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ComProj mailing list
> ComProj at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/comproj
>

-- 
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023

---
Note:  This e-mail address is used for mailing lists.  Personal emails sent
to
this address will probably get lost.

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
ComProj mailing list
ComProj at lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/comproj

End of ComProj Digest, Vol 9, Issue 12
**************************************

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.7/1152 - Release Date: 26/11/2007
10:50 AM

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.13/1170 - Release Date: 4/12/2007
10:52 AM