Hi David, *, On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 11:33 AM, David Nelson <comme...@traduction.biz> wrote: > > I'd like to suggest that there should be an editing team officially appointed:
An editing team is a good idea, however > - one *English NL* executive editor (with publishing/admin powers), one is not enough, as one might be ill/on vacation, etc. Also it doesn't quite fit in the community idea > - Charles Schulz, Florian Effenberger and Italo Vignoli as managing > editors (with publishing/admin powers). I'd rather have more of "managing editors" - not sure whether there needs to be a dedicate executive editor position, but rather a couple of "managing editors" But same as above, the list is too short, esp. as those people are heavily involved in other areas. To kick-start it, it might be enough, but it should quickly be expanded to include other people who have contributed in a reasonable fashion/have proven that they are capable of the task. > - one person from Design, Christoph Noack, with author powers, to > consult with about buttons and images. I don't otherwise see the > Design team playing much of a role in the running of the website, > beyond ensuring compliance with the graphic charter (which is > principally imposed by the theme). -1 Especially in terms of design, artworkt, etc. you cannot have enough contributors. Having one peer contact: Yes, this is desireable (i.e. one who forwards the requests of the website team and reports back the results of the design team). As it is hard enough to get artwork to put up on the site, you shouldn't artificially limit the amount of possible contributors by only having one person with "powers". > - one or two technical administrators: Christian Lohmaier and Erich > Christian (with admin powers). My suggestion would be that they do > limit themselves to *technical* administration alone, without any > interest in the content side (this is what they currently do with the > other NL sites). This should be no problem, as at least we two have other areas to work with as well :-) However I surely have an interest in the content part, since the content in the end determines what features to add to the site, etc. Focus surely is on the technical part. > - one contributors team, principally of English NL speakers (each > member with author powers). Yes, success or failure all depends on the contributors. > IMHO, if you organize things like this, you will have a tool that is > efficiently run and that will provide TDF with the most-effective > marketing platform. > > If you allow the site to be run in a chaotic, uncontrolled manner, I > think you'll lose a lot of the benefit it could otherwise bring the > foundation. Well, I somewhat disagree here. I guess the biggest problem wrt the english site is/was that there has not been an english native-lang project within the OOo-project, thus there was no group like for example in the french and german NL-projects that were already familiar with working together on website content and familiar with collaborating in an opensource project. English content on the OOo website has been created by lots of different people, none being in an "english" project, over a rather long period of time. The OOo website redesign was a lengthy process, but involved a lot of people (which was a good thing). I think it is worth to get back to that working style, although it sometimes introduces unnecessary delays or lengthy discussions - we won't have the time pressure anymore. > In any case, may I encourage you to take some clear decisions about > this over the next few days? +1 for having a dedicated Publisher/Reviewer group for proofreading the submissions, dealing as contact-point for new contributors, but -1 for limiting that group to such a small group of people, esp. you definitely need to involve design/artwork more. ciao Christian -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/steering-discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
