Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-13 Thread Yaroslav M. Blanter
- From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Tim Davenport Sent: 10 September 2014 11:12 PM To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow Having listened for the last week or two, here's what

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-11 Thread John Mark Vandenberg
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 8:21 AM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote: Tim, do you think that this list of all the useful stuff that talk pages can currently includes things that aren't being done because they are too advanced for newbie editors or too inconvenient for veterans? Regardless, you

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-11 Thread Martijn Hoekstra
On Thursday, September 11, 2014, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 8:21 AM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com javascript:; wrote: Tim, do you think that this list of all the useful stuff that talk pages can currently includes things that aren't being done because

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-11 Thread Peter Southwood
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow Having listened for the last week or two, here's what I'm getting as the WMF perspective as the three primary things attempting to be remedied with Flow: 1) Newcomers and casual contributors have a very hard time

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Martijn Hoekstra
On Sep 10, 2014 5:11 AM, Keegan Peterzell keegan.w...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote: FWIW, I signed my first comment by hand. I missed the comments about sigs in the wikitext editor interface. If it weren't for my family situation,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi. When you look at talk pages in isolation, you look at them on a computer screen. A mobile or tablet screen is increasingly not used in isolation. It is where we find our new users and editors. We cannot afford to ignore them; they are our future. This is why tinkering with talk pages is not

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Martijn Hoekstra
On Sep 10, 2014 9:35 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi. When you look at talk pages in isolation, you look at them on a computer screen. A mobile or tablet screen is increasingly not used in isolation. I'm not sure what you mean by this. It is where we find our new

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, I expected that it was obvious... Arguments that are based on desktop experiences are futile because the desktop experience is the lesser of two evils. The desktop experience is already bad, the experience on mobiles and tablets is much worse it is intolerably unusable, Yes, you are

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Martijn Hoekstra
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 9:55 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, I expected that it was obvious... Arguments that are based on desktop experiences are futile because the desktop experience is the lesser of two evils. The desktop experience is already bad, the experience

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Keegan Peterzell
In case it's not clear enough in my sig, this is my personal opinion: On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 12:20 AM, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.com wrote: On Sep 10, 2014 5:11 AM, Keegan Peterzell keegan.w...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Andrew Gray
On 8 September 2014 08:22, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 September 2014 05:46, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: If it is good software, the projects will *ask* for it to be deployed, like they did with LiquidThreads, and users will want to use it on their user talk

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread David Gerard
) Yeah, that's getting into the solves a problem I have area I was thinking of. A few more of these and experienced users will be demanding Flow. - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Risker
On 10 September 2014 07:54, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote: On 8 September 2014 08:22, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: snip * potential to work with Notifications (tell me when anyone replies to this discussion) without needing individual pings or relying on spotting

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread MF-Warburg
Am 10.09.2014 09:56 schrieb Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: Hoi, I expected that it was obvious... Arguments that are based on desktop experiences are futile because the desktop experience is the lesser of two evils. The desktop experience is already bad, the experience on mobiles

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Martijn Hoekstra
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: On 10 September 2014 07:54, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote: On 8 September 2014 08:22, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: snip * potential to work with Notifications (tell me when anyone replies to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Marc A. Pelletier
On 09/10/2014 11:45 AM, MF-Warburg wrote: What do you propose to make talk pages easier to read and analyse? That's a hard question, and I expect one where a lot of UX experimentation will need to take place before we know. But one thing /is/ known: it's going to be feasible iff the data is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread David Gerard
On 10 September 2014 16:48, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote: On 09/10/2014 11:45 AM, MF-Warburg wrote: What do you propose to make talk pages easier to read and analyse? That's a hard question, and I expect one where a lot of UX experimentation will need to take place before we

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Marc A. Pelletier
On 09/10/2014 11:53 AM, David Gerard wrote: Making entering text on a phone a process not made entirely of pain will be interesting. I don't think it's the text proper that's the issue so much as the navigation and (often) markup that uses a great deal of punctuation that phone interfaces were

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread David Gerard
On 10 September 2014 17:29, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote: Clearly, text discussion with people on phones is a known use case - and arguably the primary use of those things nowadays - so it's not like we're blazing new trails there. Editing /documents/ is a different beast

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, Ditch talk pages asap. In my opinion tinkering is mostly a waste of effort. Thanks, GerardM On 10 September 2014 17:45, MF-Warburg mfwarb...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 10.09.2014 09:56 schrieb Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: Hoi, I expected that it was obvious...

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Diego Moya
On 10 September 2014 17:47, Martijn Hoekstra I think this is something of an oops, and not really something we should judge the product on. Currently the broken mess is notify on all posts on all threads on the page, which should be notify on all posts on the subscribed thread, and possible on

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Diego Moya
Gerard, please think of the consequences of what you're proposing. There are features at talk pages (detailed watchlists, incremental diffs, true deletion of content) that allow editors and admins to detect and combat vandalism and remove BLP sensible material and libel; features which are not

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Marc A. Pelletier
On 09/10/2014 01:25 PM, Diego Moya wrote: [...] that allow editors and admins to detect and combat vandalism and remove BLP sensible material and libel; features which are not available in Flow as of today. That is simply not true, at last as of the master branch. Topics and replies can be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread David Gerard
On 10 September 2014 18:29, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote: Indeed, the Flow equivalent is even superior in at least one aspect: given that the actual comments are isolated and not differences between revision, supressing a comment containing libel that has gone unnoticed for a bit

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread James Forrester
On 10 September 2014 04:58, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 10 September 2014 12:54, Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk wrote: * inter-wiki or intra-wiki integration of multiple-venue discussions rather than several parallel pages and potentially parallel discussions (not a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Diego Moya
On 10 September 2014 19:29, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote: On 09/10/2014 01:25 PM, Diego Moya wrote: [...] that allow editors and admins to detect and combat vandalism and remove BLP sensible material and libel; features which are not available in Flow as of today. That is simply

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread David Gerard
On 10 September 2014 18:37, James Forrester jforres...@wikimedia.org wrote: There have been proposals to use a right-hand bar to show information relevant to the content in view (see related Wikidata item; articles on this subject in other languages use these images; etc.); that could be a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Todd Allen
I think that would be very helpful indeed. This part of the article was most recently discussed under subject Stop changing the genre. Click here to review or participate in the discussion. On Sep 10, 2014 11:38 AM, James Forrester jforres...@wikimedia.org wrote: On 10 September 2014 04:58,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Martijn Hoekstra
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Diego Moya dialm...@gmail.com wrote: On 10 September 2014 17:47, Martijn Hoekstra I think this is something of an oops, and not really something we should judge the product on. Currently the broken mess is notify on all posts on all threads on the page,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, Asap stands for as soon as possible. It is obvious that there I do not like the talk pages at all. That does not mean that it makes sense to replace them tomorrow. I want us to cut the crap. Absolutely get rid of talk pages and understand what it is EXACTLY what the cost benefit is of such a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Marc A. Pelletier
On 09/10/2014 01:41 PM, Diego Moya wrote: Take a look at this deleted topic at the test page that was deployed at en.wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topic:S214uoczkp47cfsx As far as I can tell, you could see it because it never /was/ deleted. I just deleted it, can you still see it? I

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread James Forrester
On 10 September 2014 10:52, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 10 September 2014 18:48, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: I think that would be very helpful indeed. This part of the article was most recently discussed under subject Stop changing the genre. Click here to review

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread David Gerard
On 10 September 2014 18:54, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: When a specific way of working insists on talk pages, it means that the associated workflow has to be revisited and changed with urgency. It cannot be permitted that special interests take the whole of the much needed

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Martijn Hoekstra
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, Asap stands for as soon as possible. It is obvious that there I do not like the talk pages at all. That does not mean that it makes sense to replace them tomorrow. I want us to cut the crap. Absolutely

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread David Gerard
On 10 September 2014 18:59, James Forrester jforres...@wikimedia.org wrote: Eh. I'm not particularly interested in building features that only work in VE and not wikitext, and particularly not in ones that would require changing both the wikitext used to write talk pages for the benefit of VE

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread James Forrester
On 10 September 2014 11:01, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 10 September 2014 18:59, James Forrester jforres...@wikimedia.org wrote: Eh. I'm not particularly interested in building features that only work in VE and not wikitext, and particularly not in ones that would require

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Michael Peel
On 8 Sep 2014, at 08:22, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 September 2014 05:46, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: If it is good software, the projects will *ask* for it to be deployed, like they did with LiquidThreads, and users will want to use it on their user talk

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Wil Sinclair
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:54 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, Asap stands for as soon as possible. It is obvious that there I do not like the talk pages at all. That does not mean that it makes sense to replace them tomorrow. I want us to cut the crap. Absolutely

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Diego Moya
Right, it's gone now. However that page survived the attempts of removal from several administrators who positively wanted to get rid of any trace of the Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Flow test page, so I don't know what it says about the discoverability of those features :-/ It's disturbing to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
this represents my personal opinion and in no way is anything official On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Diego Moya dialm...@gmail.com wrote: The feature shouldn't be notify on all posts on the subscribed thread either. I don't want to be notified every time a new thread appears at any one of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Diego Moya
On 10 September 2014 19:52, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 10 September 2014 18:48, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: I think that would be very helpful indeed. This part of the article was most recently discussed under subject Stop changing the genre. Click here to review or

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Diego Moya
On 10 September 2014 22:28, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjor...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Diego Moya dialm...@gmail.com wrote: I have about 3000 pages in my watchlist, and receive around 400 updates daily only from talk pages, which 50 or so come from unique pages;

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Diego Moya
and recommend that users disabled notifications from Flow to avoid problems. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Martijn Hoekstra
and Wikiproject Hampshire have been receiving some strange, months-old notifications this week from those Flow pages. Danny had to step in at en:Talk:Flow and recommend that users disabled notifications from Flow to avoid problems. ___ Wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread James Salsman
Wil Sinclair wrote: Flow needs a deep and broad community consensus to what would probably amount to the biggest single change in the history of the project for the day-to-day collaboration amongst editors that is so vital to our success. Wouldn't it be easier to achieve such consensus if

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Diego Moya
On 10 September 2014 22:49, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.com wrote: That doesn't make any difference, Martijn. I ''want'' to be subscribed to all the topics at my 3000 pages, I just don't want to get a notification for all them; I want to actively seek most of those at the watchlist

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Tim Davenport
Having listened for the last week or two, here's what I'm getting as the WMF perspective as the three primary things attempting to be remedied with Flow: 1) Newcomers and casual contributors have a very hard time using wiki markup language and find it difficult to participate in talk pages. Flow

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Wil Sinclair
Tim, do you think that this list of all the useful stuff that talk pages can currently includes things that aren't being done because they are too advanced for newbie editors or too inconvenient for veterans? Regardless, you make a strong argument for keeping a meta-document that spans threads

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Diego Moya
On 10 September 2014 19:54, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: I want us to cut the crap. Absolutely get rid of talk pages and understand what it is EXACTLY what the cost benefit is of such a change. That should be known in advance, before removing the old mechanisms, not as a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-10 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, What should be known in advance are the features that are important and how those features function in a workflow. During the development of software we work towards implementing such features and corresponding functionality. We may allow for partial implementation when it fulfills a need

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-09 Thread Erik Moeller
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 12:22 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 September 2014 05:46, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: Those of us who presently use talk pages to get the work done. What is going to make us *love* Flow, for all its imperfections, and demand to have it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-09 Thread David Gerard
On 9 September 2014 10:45, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 12:22 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Those of us who presently use talk pages to get the work done. What is going to make us *love* Flow, for all its imperfections, and demand to have it for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-09 Thread Diego Moya
Thanks Erik for your mindful comment. Such high level technical, social and strategic vision is rare to find. It deserves being placed in a prominent position for increased visibility, and it helps in building bridges with the community. Inter-wiki conversation sounds indeed like a killer feature

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-09 Thread Wil Sinclair
I don't know how many people here remember their first discussion on WP, but I do. Probably because it was less than 6 months ago. :) My first impression was you have got to be kidding me. I was annoyed I had to learn a new markup dialect, but that didn't deter me. Since I had some experience

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow - it does not flow

2014-09-09 Thread Samuel Klein
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: Flow is a long term bet that an architecture of structured comments will ultimately have fewer hard and fast limitations on how collaboration in wikis can work, and will accrue usability benefits very quickly (as it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-09 Thread Keegan Peterzell
On Tue, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:04 AM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote: FWIW, I signed my first comment by hand. I missed the comments about sigs in the wikitext editor interface. If it weren't for my family situation, I'm pretty sure I would have bailed. In any case, it was much easier to engage

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread David Gerard
On 8 September 2014 05:46, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: If it is good software, the projects will *ask* for it to be deployed, like they did with LiquidThreads, and users will want to use it on their user talk even if the wider community isnt ready to migrate. This is the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread Pine W
A problem that I would like Flow to solve is the high amount of labor needed to read over a dozen pages across four wikis in order for the reader to access most of the MediaViewer discussions. Pine On Sep 8, 2014 12:22 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 September 2014 05:46, John

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread Diego Moya
On 8 September 2014 05:54, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote: And yet, after over a decade of open-ended design through social convention, the end result is... our current talk pages. Perhaps another decade or two will be needed before that document-centric architecture gives us a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread Diego Moya
On 8 September 2014 11:44, Diego Moya dialm...@gmail.com wrote: Now if Erik vision for the deeper than I give him credit for, ... that would be: Now if Erik vision for the Flow platform is deeper than I give him credit for... ___ Wikimedia-l mailing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, Pine, I would like so many things.. I expect that SUL and more goodliness from this will be a requirement. For me there is urgency in having a discussion system that works for mobiles and templates... Once we have that we either have other priorities or it is a really good idea to be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread Marc A. Pelletier
On 09/08/2014 12:46 AM, John Mark Vandenberg wrote: While it may not be everybody's dream system, talk pages are quite usable, as demonstrated by a lot of people using them every single day. That's... not a demonstration of usability. Like many people, I found myself using some random blunt

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread Risker
That's not a reasonable task, Marc. Newbies have an equally hard time editing content, too, and even when they succeed, on many projects they're very likely to be reverted and deluged with templated messages in response to a good faith attempt. There is no evidentiary basis to demonstrate that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread Marc A. Pelletier
On 09/08/2014 10:18 AM, Risker wrote: The most obvious one is automatic signing of comments, and it is something that we have technically been able to impose for years; sinebot didn't come into existence in a vacuum. I suppose that's a philosophical divergence between us then - that sinebot

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread Risker
Well, I think that the article editing project (i.e., VE) has a huge potential for also resolving a lot of discussion space issues. I don't see tacking on yet another UI as being a positive for new editor introduction or retention, and cannot think of another significant site that has two such

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread phoebe ayers
Thank you for this overview and history, Erik! On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 9:49 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi all, And as above, I'm open to us putting some short term effort into talk page improvements that can be made without Flow -- knowing it's still some time out. Is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello, a) This discussion actually belongs to a talk page on Meta or Mediawiki.org, for example :-) b) All my experience in teaching Wikipedia tells me that the talk page system is absolutely outdated and inappropriate. It is, sorry to use this word, *ridiculous* that you have to teach people

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread Jon Davies
+1 On 8 September 2014 16:43, Ziko van Dijk zvand...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, a) This discussion actually belongs to a talk page on Meta or Mediawiki.org, for example :-) b) All my experience in teaching Wikipedia tells me that the talk page system is absolutely outdated and inappropriate.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread Risker
Facebook? So tell me, how do you explain to new Facebook users about the different levels of privacy? Seems to me that I'm constantly hearing about people having a lot of problems with that, especially since it's supposed to be a key site feature. I'm with you about indenting, it's always been

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-08 Thread WereSpielChequers
Responding to two comments. Firstly Risker Newbies have an equally hard time editing content, too, and even when they succeed, on many projects they're very likely to be reverted and deluged with templated messages in response to a good faith attempt. There is no evidentiary basis to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow - it does not flow

2014-09-08 Thread Erik Moeller
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: As I wrote to Risker, I think it's worth considering spending some development time on turning something like the Teahouse gadget (which allows one click insertion of replies on the Teahouse Q/A page) into a Beta Feature

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow - it does not flow

2014-09-08 Thread Erik Moeller
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: - Gabriel Wicke has done some experimentation with this as well, and is looking if he can dig up the old code for me. Very old indeed, but if anyone wants to take a look: https://github.com/gwicke/wikiforum -- Erik

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, As it is the current talk pages are horrible. You gloss over this fact because you are so fired up about the potential of end users can build new features and flows on top of it, without the need to request the platform developers to build support for them. Then you attack flow because some

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Wil Sinclair
Your suggestion is to be dismissed with prejudice because it is so obviously wrong in so many ways.. I do not care about a possible potential of a broken system at all I may want to think about features that are actively used in this broken system. Thanks, GerardM I won't be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, The central point Diego made starts from is that the current broken system has a POTENTIAL for unstructured, unaccountable changes by whomever. You do not build on a fundament that is collapsing as it is. A system that is manifestly broken particularly on the one platform where our new

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Diego Moya
Gerard, with all due respect, your reply is all based on incorrect assumptions. I recognize the severe problems that mediawiki conversations currently have, and my points about Flow acknowledge that it's incomplete software at its early stages and that it can grow into an acceptable tool for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, It is fine to disagree. What is lacking in your vision is a viable alternative and, as you acknowledge the current system is no longer viable we are in need of an alternative now. Your notions are yours and that is fine. However, we are not a debating club really. My point is very much that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Diego Moya
On 7 September 2014 13:33, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Get real and look what Flow is and how it can be improved. Check out the use cases it works for and acknowledge the achievements. THEN and only THEN consider the features that are being tested and are still deficient.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Diego Moya
...and having said and sent that previous post, I want to publicly apologize for the third paragraph counting from the end. That was uncalled for. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Wil Sinclair
Let me begin with this: my preferences lie far closer to yours, Gerard, than Diego's. I believe that we have a document oriented system that works well for stuff like encyclopedic content. But I think that we should be conducting our discussions in a discussion oriented system. That doesn't

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Marc A. Pelletier
On 09/07/2014 01:57 AM, Diego Moya wrote: a major property of a document-centric architecture that is lost in a structured one is that it's open-ended, which means that end users can build new features and flows on top of it, without the need to request the platform developers to build support

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Risker
On 7 September 2014 23:54, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote: On 09/07/2014 01:57 AM, Diego Moya wrote: a major property of a document-centric architecture that is lost in a structured one is that it's open-ended, which means that end users can build new features and flows on top of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Todd Allen
On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 9:54 PM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote: On 09/07/2014 01:57 AM, Diego Moya wrote: a major property of a document-centric architecture that is lost in a structured one is that it's open-ended, which means that end users can build new features and flows on

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Wil Sinclair
I composed the following as part of a longer message, but I decided not to send it unless others were having similar issues since I'm on track to exceed my monthly allowance of posts here ;): There's one thing in this discussion that troubles me greatly. We've got a treasure trove of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread John Mark Vandenberg
, which would increase exposure to, and acceptance of, Flow. -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Risker
On 8 September 2014 00:46, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: snip . e.g. once it is beta quality, I am sure Jimmy Wales will want it enabled on his user talk page, which would increase exposure to, and acceptance of, Flow. ...or possibly far less complaining on his page. :-)

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, There are two ways to look at the talk systems. It served us so far to some extend. It has been considered in need of replacement for a long time and consequently we have systems like Liquid Threads that are arguably at least as good in many use cases and fail in others. The other way to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-07 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, You missed the multiple discussion pages in all the other languages. They are certainly as observant, as eloquent and they have different use cases and issues as well. Thanks, GerardM On 8 September 2014 06:26, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote: I composed the following as part of a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-06 Thread Gerard Meijssen
Hoi, We includes anyone who wants to be involved and does not exclude him or herself by his or her own actions or choices. Thanks, GerardM On 6 September 2014 07:09, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 9:49 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-06 Thread Yann Forget
Hi Erik, While I have a lot of reservations about the usefulness of the Media Viewer, I agree with you that talk pages are now inefficient for all and complex for new users. Personally I am willing to try any system which offers the features missing in the current talk pages, specially removing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-06 Thread
On 6 September 2014 07:11, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, We includes anyone who wants to be involved and does not exclude him or herself by his or her own actions or choices. Thanks, GerardM Incorrect. Erik's email includes phrases like We're not pushing an

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-06 Thread Quim Gil
On Saturday, September 6, 2014, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: So we think a support forum like the Teahouse, and its equivalent in other languages may be a good place to start -- provided the hosts agree that there are no dealbreaker issues for them. What about setting up some kind

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-06 Thread Andy Mabbett
On 6 September 2014 05:49, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: Fundamentally, there's one key question to answer for talk pages in Wikimedia projects: Do we want discussions to occur in document mode, or in a structured comment mode? I rather think the more fundamental question is (for any

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-06 Thread Yann Forget
Hi, That seems a sensible plan. I am thinking of the help desk on Commons (in English or in another language) as a good testbed. Regards, Yann 2014-09-06 17:09 GMT+05:30 Quim Gil q...@wikimedia.org: On Saturday, September 6, 2014, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: So we think a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-06 Thread Magnus Manske
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote: On 6 September 2014 07:11, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, We includes anyone who wants to be involved and does not exclude him or herself by his or her own actions or choices. Thanks, GerardM

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-06 Thread
Refer to the signature Erik used. The rationale that employees when acting as employees somehow are to be wearing a hat of an unpaid volunteer was worn out when superprotect was invented. On 6 Sep 2014 14:22, Magnus Manske magnusman...@googlemail.com wrote: On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Fæ

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-06 Thread Yaroslav M. Blanter
On 06.09.2014 13:39, Quim Gil wrote: On Saturday, September 6, 2014, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: So we think a support forum like the Teahouse, and its equivalent in other languages may be a good place to start -- provided the hosts agree that there are no dealbreaker issues for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-06 Thread Dedalus
Quim Gil q...@wikimedia.org wrote: Potential requirements to join the Flow self-service: * At least one tech ambassador volunteering to act as contact between the project and the Flow team, summarizing community feedback in the channels agreed (mw:Talk:Flow, etc). * Community agreement

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-06 Thread Martijn Hoekstra
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 6:49 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi all, snip Sincerely, Erik [1] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2003-July/011069.html [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=LiquidThreadsoldid=100760 [3]

Re: [Wikimedia-l] To Flow or not to Flow

2014-09-06 Thread Todd Allen
Erik, I think a lot of reasons for the document mode commenting system got missed. But there are very good reasons we must retain that. One huge thing is that article talk pages are not only for discussions, but also for metadata (article assessments, history, Wikiproject data, as examples from

  1   2   >