thanks for the thoughtful feedback. -walter
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 5:33 PM, Sean DALY <[email protected]> wrote: > If I may offer two cents, I have worked in journalism and corporate > communications. > > As I am not sure what the target audience is for this text (FOSDEM > attendees? journalists? bloggers?), my suggestions may not be useful, > but: > > I would dispense with the negativity at the beginning. Don't bother > complaining about zero press coverage, that doesn't encourage anyone > to write about Sugar, could even be construed as bitterness towards > journalists. "OLPC ditched" is too negative; this last separation > followed previous steps and should be spun as independence=opportunity > rather than ditched=we're on the roadside. Some perspective: the > general mood around the world is far more negative due to the > financial situation than the Sugar situation; many NGOs are scaling > back (or discussing it), etc. What *you* have is good news: despite > the bad economy, despite the recent difficulties at OLPC which saw the > birth of Sugar, Sugar Labs is focused more than ever on its mission -- > and that mission should be right in the all-important lead. I would > venture that "Sugar Labs will support Sugar" doesn't qualify as > newsworthy. May I suggest using the lead to remind anyone and everyone > that the goal is education, and Sugar the vector; e.g.: "Sugar Labs, > developer of the Sugar computer learning environment for children, > announces new milestones following its recent separation from the One > Laptop Per Child organization:" > > > Acronyms: Many journalists who cover free software will know what > OLPC, OSL, SFC are. But, some may not. As bytes are inexpensive, > spelling these out will simplify any journo's work and aid search > engine indexing. > > > Development cycle: I believe it's vital to refer to the rapidity of > development - it's a key differentiator compared to proprietary > development. As it is also vital to insist on the number of Sugar > machines out in dozens of countries, I would reword the second to last > point (correcting any errors of fact): > > - The development cycle is proceeding steadily and 0.84 will be > released as planned in March. This follows the successful deployment > of 0.82 in October, preinstalled on XO machines currently shipping to > Peru, Rwanda, Uruguay, Nepal, Mongolia, Haiti, and 17 other countries, > with over half a million already deployed. > > As this is also a key milestone, and refutation to doubters, I would > counsel moving it up in the list, right to the first position -- it > answers the first question of anyone slightly informed. e.g. "What's > up with Sugar after OLPC's last announcement?". It also informs the > totally uninformed that Sugar is in front of half a million > disadvantaged youngsters. > > > Is this useful? > > Sean > > > > On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 4:09 PM, Bernie Innocenti <[email protected]> wrote: >> David Van Assche wrote: >>> Actually, this is really important, I've been asked several times >>> whether development on sugar has been stopped due to the olpc thing... >>> so its definitly a good idea to spread this message.... >> >> You seem to be good at blogging. How about reorganizing this into >> something more appealing and then publish it in various places? >> >> -- >> // Bernie Innocenti - http://www.codewiz.org/ >> \X/ Sugar Labs - http://www.sugarlabs.org/ >> _______________________________________________ >> IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) >> [email protected] >> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep >> > _______________________________________________ > IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) > [email protected] > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep > -- Walter Bender Sugar Labs http://www.sugarlabs.org _______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
