On Feb 19, 2012, at 3:03 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: > On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Dave Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Kay, >> >> On Feb 17, 2012, at 2:17 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: >> >>> OK, update on this...a contact us page is now available at: >>> http://www.openoffice.org/contact_us.html >>> >>> It is VERY simple and I did what I could for incorporating the use of our >>> existing Bug gateway (which I also made changes to in an attempt to cover >>> the existing Bugzilla categories. As with all of the ooo-site, anyone >> with >>> comitter rights can make changes. >>> >>> Dave, please incorporate into the footer if you're doing seem editing on >>> that as you see fit. Having a link next to the Copyright and Licenses >> seems >>> fine though that is followed by a paragraph specifically related to that. >> >> >>> >>> My preference would be to have "Contact Us" centered immediately below >> the >>> footer line if possible. >> >> I've rearranged the header and the publishing sledgehammer is running now. >> >> Centered "Copyrights & License | Contact Us" link. >> Space >> Trademark statement >> Space >> Incubation statement. >> > > SUPER! I'm just a bit of a chicken at messing with the footers and header! > :/
I'm working on fixing things. Regards, Dave > > >>> >>> Have fun! >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 9:12 AM, Kay Schenk <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 1:48 PM, Louis Suárez-Potts < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 10 February 2012 18:52, Kay Schenk <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 12:30 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I agree with Kay that one reason someone may want to contact us is >>>>> because >>>>>>> there is a problem with the web site itself. I also think that going >>>>>>> directly to the mailing list page is perhaps too abrupt. Some free >>>>>>> analysis from the top of orcmid's head: >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> yes, really, this was my intention -- but I think Rob's calrification >>>>> would >>>>>> work for that. I started wondering about this in light of the recent >>>>>> communication re that bad link. How long did it take Rick to figure >> out >>>>> who >>>>>> to contact, etc. (I also know we need to get going with some >> reasonable >>>>>> analysis tool to tract these down *beforehand* if we can) . I didn't >>>>> mean >>>>>> for this to be a "user centric" catchall. >>>>>> >>>>>> I can certainly understand the value of a User centric FAQ in this >>>>> regard. >>>>>> And we may even have one! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> For issues about the site(s) itself, I think a bottom-of-page link is >>>>>>> fine. It might go to another web page that refines the contact based >>>>> on >>>>>>> particular cases (two that should always be prominent and >>>>> straightforward >>>>>>> are for the site and for anything to do with security concerns -- but >>>>> not >>>>>>> directly to ooo-security.). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> With user issues, taking people directly to bugzilla is effectively a >>>>>>> giant FU for ordinary users. A bullet item that links to how to file >>>>> a bug >>>>>>> and also links directly to bugzilla is good, so experts don't have to >>>>> do >>>>>>> the drill-down. (Might need a branch for those needing a bugzilla >>>>> account >>>>>>> too.) [Something like this might help refine the security case as >>>>> well.] >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I think you're right on this one. BZ is too daunting jut to report a >>>>> link >>>>>> problem unless we can implement a nicer front end to BZ just for these >>>>>> cases. I will be happy to investigate this. We may even be able to do >> a >>>>>> "proxy login" of some sort. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Then I think there can be explanation that all other support is peer >>>>>>> support from other users and developer volunteers, with some >> indication >>>>>>> about the options (wiki, forums, web site, mailing-list >> subscriptions, >>>>> and >>>>>>> bugzilla) and how to search/explore/choose among them. This would >>>>> probably >>>>>>> be right after something about web site issues and security concerns. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Third tier on some of these might be FAQ that provide more detail and >>>>> help >>>>>>> users address common concerns. (I.e., what to do when an AV product >>>>> says >>>>>>> their download is infected, what the project does to ensure the >>>>> integrity >>>>>>> of binaries and how to find those to be confident in them, how to >> check >>>>>>> their authenticity, etc. That's been going around lately.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Finally, of course, there is always the welcoming of those who might >>>>> want >>>>>>> to themselves contribute to an aspect that is a concern or interest >> for >>>>>>> them. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> yes... :) I hope this is reasonably covered in the revisions to the >>>>> "Help >>>>>> Wanted" page I made, but, of course, it's an ongoing process. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I suppose I should put myself in this last category, although I am >> not >>>>>>> prepared to figure out how to work on such a page [set]. Sorry. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Dennis >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks for the feedback from everyone, I will investigate options >>>>> further. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Kay Schenk [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>>>> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 09:43 >>>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [WWW] Feedback/"contact us" about the website link >>>>> needed... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [ ... ] >>>>>>>> Another way to think of it: 99.99% of the time, if a user actually >>>>>>>> needs to contact us, then the website has failed its purpose. We >> can >>>>>>>> only handle 100 million users if, for the vast majority of cases, >>>>> they >>>>>>>> can self-support themselves via the website's navigation and find >>>>> what >>>>>>>> they want. So the challenge here is to handle the exceptional 0.01% >>>>>>>> of cases, without becoming the path of least resistance for the >> other >>>>>>>> 99.99%. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -Rob >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Rob-- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I understand what you're saying, believe me. I guess I feel we should >>>>>>> provide an easier avenue for people to report problems with the site >>>>>>> itself. I'm also aware that if I just put in a simple link with a >>>>> "mailto" >>>>>>> tag, many folks won't be able to deal with that because they won't >>>>> have a >>>>>>> "default" e-mail client. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> How about a "Contact Us" link that directs them to our existing >>>>> "Mailing >>>>>>> List" page -- >>>>>>> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/mailing-lists.html. >>>>>>> We could add a bit more description to the "Development Mailing List" >>>>> to >>>>>>> indicate that it would be used for submitting questions/problems >> about >>>>> the >>>>>>> web site. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Or do you think it would be best to direct them to BZ? >>>>> >>>>> Briefly: the Contact Us link usually went to me, in OOo. The traffic >>>>> can be high or low; low if one does it right, and routes people >>>>> appropriately. Basic rules apply: you don't answer "how-to" questions, >>>>> unless you are a masochist. You answer the other, much fewer in >>>>> number, questions. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Louis-- and thanks for this response. For now, I was going to set >> this >>>> up as a "portal" for dealing with web site issues ONLY -- the link will >> be >>>> called "Report Problems with the Web Site", taking users to an landing >> page >>>> that will initially search for all "issues" in BZ related to the web >> site, >>>> so the user can see what's already been reported, and optionally, add >> to an >>>> existing issue or create a new one. >>>> >>>> But...it might be a good idea to also include some mention of the >>>> "Support" page on this intermediate BZ landing/search page. This should >>>> take care of a great portion of the support issues. Good suggestion! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> I volunteer to continue in the role I've grown mossy over. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks. I'm just going to set this up for BZ as previously suggested. >>>> >>>> >>>>> I also think that IFF we are intending to replicate some of the >>>>> friendly to endusers approach of the old OOo, then we would do well to >>>>> emulate some of the pages we had: >>>>> >>>>> * FAQ on simple things, like where to go with issues *using* OOo and >>>>> also *building* and "developing* it. We already have much of that, so >>>>> this would just be links. >>>>> >>>>> * Support page: I think the old support page can simply, as is already >>>>> being done, be updated and pruned. (Drew is on this, I believe?) >>>>> >>>>> * License and trademark issues: this was the more difficult one and >>>>> merits for attention, at least for the more difficult questions. >>>>> Others are routine, and we've discussed this already here. >>>>> >>>>> Further along these lines: Even if we are not plunging into minimally >>>>> addressing users (and I think we ought not to shift our shape so to >>>>> max unless we actually want to), we will be dealing with the >>>>> media--professional as well as "citizen" journalists. Having, as we >>>>> had before, a "press kit," done in accordance with Apache, will help >>>>> both us and any member of the fourth estate. >>>>> >>>>> Louis >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> MzK >>>> >>>> "Follow your bliss." >>>> -- attributed to Joseph Campbell >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> MzK >>> >>> "Follow your bliss." >>> -- attributed to Joseph Campbell >> >> > > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > MzK > > "Follow your bliss." > -- attributed to Joseph Campbell
