On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 5:32 PM, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Kay Schenk <[email protected]> wrote: > > OK, update on this...a contact us page is now available at: > > http://www.openoffice.org/contact_us.html > > > > I think it would be better if the "If you want to contact the Apache > OpenOffice developer team..." was the last option. So give the > "self-service" options first. If none of them apply, then they see > how to contact the ooo-dev list. In general, put the most-likely > solution first, then in decreasing order the solutions that require > more effort. > OK, I'll change this today sometime...no problem > > -Rob > > > > 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. > > > > Have fun! > > > > > > 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
