On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Graham Lauder <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thursday 29 Dec 2011 09:52:13 Rob Weir wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 3:34 PM, drew <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Wed, 2011-12-28 at 15:15 -0500, Rob Weir wrote: >> >> On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 2:44 PM, drew <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > On Wed, 2011-12-28 at 14:26 -0500, Rob Weir wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Kay Schenk <[email protected]> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> <snip> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Hi Andrew -- >> >> >> > >> >> >> > I just forward the message I received from Rob in total to " >> >> >> > [email protected]". Got a return from SYMPA that the editors >> >> >> > would look at it. If you or anyone else knows some magic to push >> >> >> > this through, that would be great. The [email protected] has about >> >> >> > 84000 users! >> >> >> >> >> >> FYI, we currently have only 134 subscribers to the announce list. >> >> > >> >> > And the sky is blue - my suggestion use the website cut over for a >> >> > legitimate announce list class event - send to both the new and the >> >> > old announce list (assume and ask for it to be moderated onto the old >> >> > one) - put a copy to the blog, even if others a planning more >> >> > extensive blog posts - an extra simple post won't hurt. >> >> >> >> It might make sense to webs site migration, along with all the other >> >> migration accomplishments as part of a general engagement with those >> >> users. Here's what we've done, here's what we are doing now, here's >> >> what to expect in 2012, here's where to find more info, etc. >> >> >> >> Remember, aside from a few hundred people (a relatively small number) >> >> most of the 84,000 subscribers to the announce list will be hearing >> >> about AOO for the first time. The initial note will be our >> >> re-introduction. >> > >> > right - which might be the spot where Grahams concerns start to kick >> > in.. just sayin'. >> > >> > I'm not sure from reading his posts if he is actually urging that we not >> > play this up for the moment, but delay till a release and by then to >> > have formulated and executed a more extensive re-branding...then again >> > I'm likely not fully interrupting his thoughts correctly, such is the >> > norm for written communications. >> > >> > So - in my head the answer for the moment is: keep it very simple - a >> > couple of paragraphs with the explicit aim of getting the reader to come >> > visit the new site (not so much a full overview of events) >> > - those interested can find the new communication channels on the new >> > web pages. >> > >> > maybe something a kin to - > > @ Drew: Your announcement style is on the money, exactly what is needed. > > Reasoning: We don't have a huge advertising budget and the truth of the matter > is, no matter how many deny it, is that advertising dollars translate into > copy. If you don't have a real story, just padding or vapour, buy a chunk of > ad space and suddenly BS becomes Font Page news. (This doesn't apply to trade > press as much, but our demographic goes way beyond trade) It is necessary > therefore to actually have a story with some depth and real interest to a > particular Journo. For instance: Market penetration stories would interest > WSJ readers, value stories go after consumer magazine audience and so on. But > the story needs substance to get noticed by these people who are in fact > speaking to our larger demographic, who have never read Steven Vaughan-Nichols > or Dana Blankenhorne or Rob Weirs or Simon Phipps blogs and are never likely > to. > > > > >> > ********** >> >> For all but 500 or so of the 84,000 this would be entirely without >> context. They would say, "Apache what? What the heck is a Podling?" > > Which would be brilliant, that means you've started a conversation, if you > could get them asking that question, then you have achieved a significant > step. >
Are you volunteering to write something up, Graham? -Rob
