[Foundation-l] Personal Image Filter results announced

[Thomas Morton]

>
> It is very hard to cater for someone when you are not engaged with
> them in conversation. Any attempts to do so are doomed to make an ASS
> of U and ME (ASSUME).
>

It is hard, sure; most users/consumers don't engage - which is why a whole
industry has grown around finding out what they want and meeting that need.

But just because it is hard is not an excuse to not bother :)

Unless you are suggesting that our current use as a knowledge-base is
incidental to the point of Wikipedia (which seems a little out of track with
out goals...).


> Don't ASSUME. ASK!
>
> We have an existing mechanism by which people can engage and ASK, but
> many choose not to use it. Per definition, they are forfeiting their
> rights, unfortunately, (if they even exist).


You have to solicit those views, hunt them down and beat out of them what
their gripes and bug bears are. They will not come to you.

This is the basics of creating  a good product.

You have the process the wrong way round - leaving the consumer to be the
one doing the asking. But they are a mundane person flicking through reading
articles, some might have ideas on how to improve thins. But you won't find
them telling us without prompting.

This is why big companies will invest millions of dollars finding out what
it is their consumers want.

We are the ones who have to ASK

Incidentally, many attempts to "help" "readers" end up actually
> disenfranchising them. (and also disenfranchise anyone who might have
> been in a position to help them). Why? Because it puts a wedge
> between producers and consumers, even while we're attempting to
> create a prosumer class.
>

Usually because the producers think they know what consumers want. Which
never really works.

By contrast your approach/attitude creates the exact dichotomy you claim to
oppose.

Tom

(BTW your comments are coming across as acerbic/ironic and at times a quite
patronising - that is perhaps hampering people's ability to respond
constructively)