Brandon Harris wrote: > This reads to me like you're trying to start a fight with the Usability > team, and I don't rightly cotton to that idea. The team is comprised of > many people, all with different opinions to be sure - but they are all > *dedicated to the mission.*
I wasn't aware "cotton" could be used a verb. Thanks for that. Your point is hollow, though. > So you should assume good faith, even if you disagree. When there's a financial incentive to change the interface, the interface is going to change, regardless of whether it's an improvement or necessary. I think this is partially (perhaps more than partially) the reason that Wikimedia is now shifting away from large grants in favor of small donations. (Sue may have said as much explicitly, I'd have to look.) And, for what it's worth, I think it's a smart shift. Brandon Harris wrote: > It is possible for long-term or power-users of Wikimedia software to > change the skin they use if they find serious fault with Vector. Oliver Keyes wrote: > Impose? You know it can be turned off, right? Being able to disable the skin is one of the reasons it won't see improvement. It's far less effort to switch your personal skin back to the old default (which is what thousands of people have done) than battle those who have imposed (yes, imposed) the new skin. And when the power-users and long-term contributors (those who have accounts‹anonymous users can't change their skin) switch back, the incentive to work on improving the skin greatly diminishes. This is a basic principle of interface design; I'm sure there's a Wikipedia article about it somewhere. MZMcBride _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
