Ok I had the impression that it had to all be done before we start the experiment to give them a good benchmark. I have 4 done as of last night, I'm almost done a more elegant 5th one. The separate section idea, but all the existing backgrounds have arrows suggesting "download" or "get". I created its own "share" background http://postimage.org/image/9brst32ex/ which we can clean up more if we choose to go with it. I changed the Hue and replaced the images with the vector art of Share I created in Inkscape.
I have some errands after work, I might be able to churn out a few more designs. I will also name them correctly before handing them off to you. I just have to figure out paths and changes into a document (or here), so that its clear what is to be changed/deployed and in what path. On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 10:54 PM, Samer Mansour <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Oh, I'm sooo excited. I can help with coding the different pages. We > could > > do the like and share experiments separately so they are not affecting > each > > others results. > > > > Lets start with a sharing experiment. > > > > We could make the labels "test1-footer" "test2-header" "test3-searchbar" > as > > opposed to "facebook", "google", "twitter". We don't care which network > > they pick, its the placement/wording/style whether they see/convenient to > > click it. The metric would sum the three buttons for each test, under > the > > same label. > > > > We can all make friendly bets, like picking which horse will win a race. > > Once we collectively come up with 9, we'll start a separate thread where > > people can give their prediction. > > > > In the spirit of JFDI, I will make the variations you suggested Rob right > > now. I will wait until Tuesday Night for anyone else variation > suggestion > > on this thread. > > > > OK. I've made some changes to the main website to accommodate the > experiment. The issues was that the website logic would automatically > try to apply the site template to our test pages, wiping them out. > With my change any page that ends in "-passthru.html" will be > unprocessed by the site template and will be displayed as-is. So > we'll need to name our test bases something like > "social-variation1-passthru.html", etc. > > Let me know when you have some variations ready to test and I can get > them provisioned onto the website. > > Also, we should avoid putting the actual test file names and links > onto the mailing list. That would encourage list subscribers to load > the pages and since our behavior differs from the random visitor's > behavior this can distort the experiment, > > -Rob > > > > > On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> 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 > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >
