I have heard very few people say "don't ever change the interface." I have heard people say "don't force an interface change on me that I don't think is an improvement."
VE was a good example. The sentiment of the community wasn't that VE''s concept is wrong, it's that the implementation and rollout had major deficiencies. The MV issue is larger than than the usual editor-focused interface change because it impacts readers as well as editors, and there were issues with the display of licenses to readers. Personally I feel that the MV issues are fixable but the rollout should have been handled differently, and I am glad that the community and WMF both want to avoid repeating rollout problems again and again. Pine On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 4:48 AM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hoi, > In the metrics meeting, a presentation was given that showed that mobile > editing is really starting to happen. It is happening to the extend where > new editors are predominantly mobile editors. > > When I asked my question "do we need to keep you happy" I specifically > targeted the vitriolic parts of our community. In my experience it it the > part that is conservative, not willing to listen, not open to change and > not willing to consider what is important to others.At Wikimania one of the > presenters indicated that he was willing to contribute to Wikidata. This > was not accepted because "someone in the community is really involved in > this subject and he had to have a say". This was one major person probably > walking away for ever who is hugely important in science and open data. The > user interface for selecting fonts is abysmal because the "community" > decided that what was implemented looked cluttered. Only seven percent of > the world population is dyslexic and they do NOT find Wikipedia easier to > read as a result. > > Really, what is important to some people in the "community" is not > necessarily beneficial at all. The lack of conversation the ease of making > demands and not appreciating that our aim is to "share in the sum of all > knowledge" means that many retarded points of view abound. > > Erik indicated that he is willing to talk and come to a workable > compromise. However, we do need change and we need it badly. When this is > not understood, I am sorry to say, those who fail to understand this are a > problem, a problem that is increasingly cancelling out their future value. > Thanks, > Gerard > > > On 24 August 2014 12:49, Dariusz Jemielniak <dar...@alk.edu.pl> wrote: > > > hi, > > > > On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Gerard Meijssen < > > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Now what do we aim to achieve? Keeping you happy or making sure we > have a > > > public ??? > > > > > > > simply put: both. We need readers just as much as we need the free labor > of > > editors/volunteers. > > > > I don't think it makes any sense to have a discussion about the "wasted > > millions". First, in software development there is always some inevitable > > waste, just because of the nature of this endeavor. Second, many projects > > which start with mixed reception are getting better (and I have high hope > > that the visual editor is one of them!). Third, for an IT organization of > > this caliber and traffic, as well as the budget, there are impressive > > results in many areas (including, but not limited to, mobile website - at > > least for viewers, as editing is a different story). > > > > The real problem here, in my view, is creating an organizational > framework > > that will allow to incorporate the community much more into planning, > early > > development, alpha and beta testing, and finally implementation of all > new > > features and tools (in a way which does not rely on IT schedules only, > but > > also on feedback from the communities). It is up to WMF to create and > > provide such framework, as our community as a whole does not have any > > institutionalized representation or voice (which is part of the issue; > one > > the one hand it is easy to discard whatever people from the community > say, > > as they are random individuals, and on the other it must be deeply > > frustrating to never be sure what the community reaction will be). Some > > people are suggesting stewards as the good group to start with - I'm > afraid > > stewards are not the best ones to go to. Stewards act mainly as highly > > trusted, experienced individuals. They do not represent their local > > communities in any way. Also, they do not necessarily have the best > skills > > for the task, and they do not form a cooperating team, in general. > > > > One of the unbearable signs of bureaucracy is setting up committees, but > > here a volunteer-driven, democratic task force could actually make some > > sense, perhaps. Look at it this way - we elect admins, crats, checkusers, > > oversighters, stewards. All these roles are only technical. Perhaps at > some > > point we should think of community representation as well (and not in the > > sense of leadership, but in the sense of liaisons, testers, people > > responsible for smoother communication). > > > > My experience within the FDC has shown that volunteer-driven bodies are > > quite effective at such tasks, when provided with necessary > organizational > > support. > > > > best, > > > > dariusz "pundit" > > > > > > > > -- > > > > __________________________ > > prof. dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak > > kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego > > i centrum badawczego CROW > > Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego > > http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl > > > > członek Akademii Młodych Uczonych Polskiej Akademii Nauk > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > Wikimediaemail@example.com > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>