On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 1:24 AM, Samer Mansour <[email protected]> wrote: > 1. Progress on "Download Share" - Smaller images and text, anti-aliased > using inkscape. > http://www.winsor.ca/samer/aootest2.htm > > 2. Progress made on possible template placements for "Follow OpenOffice" > http://www.winsor.ca/samer/aootest3.htm - Left Nav Links & Header Links > http://www.winsor.ca/samer/aootest4.htm - Title Nav Links & Footer Links > > In 2. should we eliminate some placements? Or should we experiment all 4 in > separate files? >
As I understand it each Content Experiment needs to test one thing, have one goal that we measure. For example, we could measure % of visits that generate a page share via a social network. So it looks like we want to have at least two different content experiments: 1) On the download page, to test sharing. 2) On another typical page, to test the follow/like buttons. Would it be worth starting with the first experiment, and then based on what we learn there, then do the second? Within each experiment, we can have the original page (the unmodified "control" that we are comparing to) and up to 9 different variations. We add some special Javascript to the original page and Google then randomly redirects users to one of the variations. Google tracks the % of users meet some "goal" (typically a specific page view or click), When Google determines that one of the variations is best to a statistically significant 95% confidence threshold, then it ends the experiment and tells us the winner. So for each experiment we need some variations and a way of tracking the goal. For the variations, what could we do on the download page? Assume for sake of the experiment we're testing just the share links. (We can test the follow/like links separately and eventually combine them in the final solution) Just brainstorming... 1) What you have here: http://www.winsor.ca/samer/aootest2.htm 2) Variation on #1, but instead of three icons with three text captions, have a single text caption, "Please tell your friends about the free Apache OpenOffice" (or similar) followed by three uncaptioned icons. 3) Variation on #2 but with different text. 4) Variation on #2 but with different text. 5) A bigger bolder placement, a full block, same size and style as the "Get Apache OpenOffice Extensions" block. Maybe text saying "Tell your friends about the free Apache OpenOffice!" and big FB, Twitter and Google+ icons. 6) Variation on #2 with different text: "Please tell your friends about Apache OpenOffice" 7) Variation on #2 with different text: "Thank you for telling your friends about Apache OpenOffice" 8) Variation on #2 with different text: "Help spread the word about Apache OpenOffice" 9) ??? We have several volunteers with copy writing experience, so it would be good to have suggestions for alternatives to test. We can have a little contest. Who can come up with the icon placement and wording that will score the highest in a live test? I'm happy to give up my variations above if someone wants to propose an additional variation. On the tracking side we'll need some Javascript, so Google Analytics knows that a goal is achieved. Typical way is to define events: https://developers.google.com/analytics/devguides/collection/gajs/eventTrackerGuide Each event has a category, an action, and a label. Maybe we have: category = social action = share or like label = facebook, twitter or google+ For example, if the link is to share on Facebook, then the link would look like this: <a href=http://facebook-link"; onClick="_gaq.push(['_trackEvent', 'social', 'share', 'facebook']);">Tell your friends about us!</a> This will be interesting! Regards, -Rob > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Samer Mansour <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Kadal, >> >> I'm hoping to write some "personas" for user center design, I will take >> those stories and integrate them. >> My expectation is that a set of personas will be consider when ever we >> develop a new feature. >> >> Rob, >> >> Google's experimentation feature +1 >> - - >> It a lazy agreement on Google, Twitter and Facebook's developer sites, >> they are cool with you using the logo to drive traffic to their site as >> long as you don't alter it. Resizing is generally acceptable: >> >> https://twitter.com/logo >> http://www.facebook.com/brandpermissions/logos.php >> https://developers.google.com/+/plugins/share/#sharelink-sizes >> >> Although I don't know how they enforce it, I've seen some really butchered >> logos. >> I experimented with smaller icons, problem is pixelation because no >> anti-aliasing in MS Paint. Inkscape might fix that, try that tonight. >> - - >> "I want to stay in touch with OpenOffice" on the home page clicking that >> goes here: >> http://www.openoffice.org/social/ it needs a little cleaner layout for >> the user to see all the sites listed in a smiliar manner and click to go >> straight to the profile on the social media site. The widgets there right >> now break privacy, which is fine in consensus, but I will generally -1 that >> behavior, unless it truely provides value to our users. >> >> Site wide is 'like/follow'. 'Share' is articles and special pages like >> volunteering or download. >> >> Let me mock up a secondary page that is using the template (eg >> http://www.openoffice.org/product/index.html) and place the buttons in >> different sizes and places. If I have time I could experiment with a >> single generic "social" button that creates an dropdown like effect >> onmousehover or onmouseclick where the user then makes their social media >> choice. >> - - >> >> Ok let me take this feedback and take a few more steps in the above >> direction. >> >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 11:53 AM, James Grenier < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Thanks, Rob. >>> >>> Very interested in social media integration. Looking forward to seeing >>> the next set of plans. >>> >>> >>> J. M. Grenier, M.Ed. >>> Faculty, Business and Humanities >>> [email protected] >>> Cell: (339)222-1442 >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: Rob Weir [[email protected]] >>> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 9:35 AM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [Iteration 1] Social Media Integration on OO.org Site >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:05 AM, Samer Mansour <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > This thread is focused on completing the ability to share the download >>> > page. A separate iteration will be planned for the rest of the site. A >>> > following iteration will plan for a better share ecosystem, such as a >>> > landing page to convince new users with a video about aoo. I still need >>> to >>> > draft up a plan. I will post that more likely this weekend to get >>> feedback. >>> > >>> > Moving on, >>> > >>> > Subject 1: I was asked to provide the change in context. I've hosted an >>> > edited HTML file with the open graph meta tags specified, facebook uses >>> > this standard. I also added the schema.org tags as google+ uses that >>> > standard. >>> > >>> > Here is the altered file: >>> > http://www.winsor.ca/samer/aootest2.htm >>> > >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> I tried it on my machine (Windows 7/Firefox 17.01) and it worked great. >>> >>> Is there something we can do to make this more integrated with the >>> look of the page? Maybe reducing the saturation of the social icons >>> would make them blend more? >>> >>> What's the right balance here? On the one hand we want to emphasize >>> the links. On the other hand we want them to blend in well with the >>> overall page design. So we want them to stick out, but not stick out >>> too much. >>> >>> > Here is the difference when meta data is provided to the bots: >>> > >>> > >>> https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=www.winsor.ca/samer/aootest.htm >>> > vs. >>> > >>> https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=www.openoffice.org/download/ >>> > >>> > What do people think? >>> >>> One text change: It should be "OpenOffice" with no space in the messages. >>> >>> I like how you mention the 28 million downloads. That number >>> increases by around a million every 7-10 days. So if we include a >>> precise number this will quickly be out of date. Maybe we can say >>> something more generic? >>> >>> >>> > >>> > Subject 2: I've placed two different types of social media integration >>> > areas. >>> > 1. Just below the download area. (These are wall-post buttons) >>> > 2. Just below the right hand navigation links. (These are links to aoo >>> > profiles) >>> > >>> >>> Something to consider when we look at doing something site-wide. Take >>> a look at a typical website page: >>> http://www.openoffice.org/why/why_gov.html >>> >>> The following areas are part of the site-wide template: >>> >>> 1. The logo and tag >>> >>> 2. The announcement message >>> >>> 3. The top navigation menu (Product/Download/Support., etc.) >>> >>> 4. the footer (everything under the horizontal rule, copyright, etc.) >>> >>> We can also define additional locations in the template. For example, >>> if we want a "social panel" or "social bar" at the top or bottom. >>> >>> So maybe we do the "share" buttons specifically for the download page, >>> but do the "like/follow" ones in a site-wide fashion? >>> >>> > Subject 3: How many social sites do we add? (Definitely limited to ones >>> we >>> > already have created and supported.) We could pick a few key networks we >>> > know we can support. >>> > >>> >>> You have our current big three: Facebook, Twitter and Google+. >>> >>> >>> > If you choose to reply, provide feedback corresponding to the subject >>> > number. >>> > >>> > Samer >>> >> >>
