Pine W wrote:
>The hypothetical here is that I have a binary choice between Echo and
>Flow. In practice it's possible to develop them in parallel. With the
>hypothetical in mind, I'll outline why I would prioritize Echo.
>
>My thinking is that Echo is used widely on many, many wikis and is helpful
The discussion about Flow that I referened is currently happening on Lila's
talk page on Meta. Would you like to join the conversation there? The
discussion there might get more staff attention than Wikimedia-l. (I hear a
number of staff avoid Wikimedia-l because they find the tone to be hostile
Agreed. If I had a binary choice between investing in Echo and investing in
Flow, I would be inclined to choose Echo.
Pine
On Nov 14, 2015 7:08 AM, "Derk-Jan Hartman"
wrote:
> Thank goodness. Finally we might be able to start fully building out the
> promise of
Pine W wrote:
>Agreed. If I had a binary choice between investing in Echo and investing
>in Flow, I would be inclined to choose Echo.
Can you please elaborate on why you would prioritize Echo over Flow? The
Wikimedia Foundation has made the same decision and it's mind-boggling to
me. I'd really
Hi MZMcBride,
The hypothetical here is that I have a binary choice between Echo and Flow.
In practice it's possible to develop them in parallel. With the
hypothetical in mind, I'll outline why I would prioritize Echo.
My thinking is that Echo is used widely on many, many wikis and is helpful
to
Thank goodness. Finally we might be able to start fully building out the
promise of powerful, targeted and appropriate messaging that Echo always was
the the kick off for.
I especially like the acknowledgment of the 'volume knob'. Balancing the
'noise' of messaging is going to be really
Hi, this is an update on the work we in the Collaboration team are
doing. Our focus is on cross-wiki notifications and other back-end
improvements to that system.
Our long-term goals are to make various improvements to the Notification system.
Notifications are at the core of many different