Ah, I see. I am the problem. Glad we cleared that up. On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 6:56 AM Isarra Yos <zhoris...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You just don't get it, do you? Even from the start this was all about > social issues with rollouts, and still you are contributing to the very > same social problems you so blindly condemned. > > -I > > On 20/01/16 14:16, Magnus Manske wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:58 AM Todd Allen <toddmal...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> Once the VisualEditor was fit for purpose and a good deployment strategy > >> had been developed, the English Wikipedia community overwhelmingly > >> supported rolling it out. ( > >> > >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_125#Gradually_enabling_VisualEditor_for_new_accounts > >> ) > >> > > That is for new accounts only. Without an account, still no VE for you, > > even if you are probably the one needing it most. > > > >> It's not Luddism, it's not "resistance to change", it's not "power > users" > >> grumpy about newbies having an easier time, it's not anything like that. > >> It's that in the state it was initially released in, the thing did not > >> work. > >> > > No one said "Luddism", except to defend against its use. Odd. > > > > > >> So yes, by all means, let's try new things. But try: > >> > >> 1: Asking us what we actually want, before coding something up and > feeling > >> obligated to push it out. People are a lot more receptive to something > they > >> asked for than something being forced upon them. That's been an issue > with > >> Flow. It's not that it doesn't work well (though it doesn't), it's that > it > >> wasn't wanted to start with. So instead of "Here's the new discussion > >> system", ask "What can we do to make our system of discussion better?" > >> > > Listening to what editors want is important. ONLY listening to wad > editors > > want is bad. People often don't know what they want or need, until they > see > > it. Compare the famous (possibly misattributed) Henry Ford quote: > > “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster > > horses.” > > > > Also, veteran editors do not represent the readers or casual/newbie > > editors; their needs are often quite different. > > > > > >> 2: Make sure it works. Have an opt-in beta phase. Doesn't have to be > >> perfect, but certainly make sure it's not breaking page formatting all > over > >> the place. You'll notice, for example, that there wasn't really any > >> resistance to HHVM. It worked well, it was desirable, it was clearly fit > >> for purpose. So no, there isn't just a reflexive change aversion. Though > >> the previous missteps and hamfisted followups have, rather ironically, > >> created a lot of the reflexive change aversion that people said was > there. > >> > > Wrong example. The HHMV switch was a back-end change that should have had > > no visible effect. As long as the servers are fast, people don't really > > care what's going on there. Did e.g. English Wikipedia actually vote on > > HHMV? > > > >> 3: Be nice (but NOT condescending or patronizing) if an issue comes up. > >> "Superprotect" alienated people right quickly, and turned what could > have > >> been a productive (if tense) conversation into a war. Same with refusal > to > >> budge on VE and the arrogant tone several people took. Yes, some people > >> might be rude about objecting to the change. Don't sink to their level. > If > >> they call the new software a steaming pile, ask "Could you offer more > >> concrete feedback?" > >> > > Superprotect was used to revert an admin action on de.wikipedia, an > action > > that might actually fall under U.S. or German computer sabotage laws. > This > > was hailed as some heroic action by that vocal group I keep mentioning, > > when it can easily be seen as someone abusing the privileges given by the > > Foundation (as owners of the servers) to deactivate functionality put in > > place by the Foundation. > > The creation and subsequent use of superprotect was not exactly the most > > wise decision ever undertaken, but neither was the original sabotage > > (literally so; using access to a machine to stop it from working, just > not > > using a wooden shoe). > > And while it is always good to ask for more concrete feedback, it is even > > better to offer it to begin with. > > > > > >> 4: Don't surprise people. Not everyone follows the Village Pumps or what > >> have you. If a major new feature is set to roll out, do banners, do > >> watchlist notices, do whatever it takes, but make sure people know. When > >> Mediaviewer was rolled out, all of a sudden, I was just having images > act > >> completely different. I had no idea what was going on. People are more > >> amenable to change if you brace them for it. Even better, do that to > >> develop a rollout strategy in advance with the community. (You already > know > >> they want it; they asked for it. Right?) > >> > > The Foundation appears to be doing this already. I even saw a mail about > it > > today. > > > > > >> 5: If at all feasible, offer an easy opt-out. People are actually more > >> likely to give something a decent try if they know they can switch back > if > >> they don't like it. > >> > > IIRC, both VE and MediaViewer offered opt-out from the beginning; the MV > > opt-out just was "below the fold" or something. > > > > > >> 6: Show willingness to budge. "No, we won't do ACTRIAL, period." "You > get > >> VE, like it or not." "You're getting Mediaviewer even if we have to > develop > >> a new protection level to cram it down your throats!" That type of > >> hamfisted, I'm-right-you're-wrong approach will gear people right up > for a > >> fight. Fights are bad. Discussions are good. But people don't like to > talk > >> to a brick wall. > >> > > Everyone (as in, the vast majority of people I ever spoke to, approaching > > 100%) agreed that Wikipedia editing, especially for newbies, sucked. > > Everyone agreed that what happened when clicking on a file in Wikipedia > was > > confusing for most readers. > > These are not issues the Foundation just made up in some ivory tower; > there > > was little dispute that something should be done. So the Foundation did, > > and switched their solution on, for everyone, because most users are > "just" > > readers, not editors, and see an actual improvement. Neiter VE nor MV was > > perfect in the beginning; neither is now. They just got better over time. > > So MV is active for everyone, including IPs, even on German Wikipedia, > > right now. Because it's beeter for most people, and it works. Why did it > > need to be completely switch off again? > > > > > >> Many of us were asking for a WYSIWYG editor for some time, because we > very > >> much need a way to reach out to prospective editors who are intimidated > by > >> wikimarkup or just don't care to learn it. So it wasn't that we were > >> opposed to VE in principle. Good idea, bad execution. > >> > > As someone who has worked on alternative Wikitext parsers, and > alternative > > interfaces, rest assured that the execution was quite good for an initial > > version. As I said before, it is impossible to get this perfect right > away. > > Just like it is impossible (literally, as in "not possible") to reliably > > get the license for an image in MV on all cases. The community/vocal > group > > needs to show some patience when developers are trying their best to get > a > > giant project up and running smoothy. > > > > Cheers, > > Magnus > > > > > >> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:39 AM, Anthony Cole <ahcole...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >>> Magnus, you've missed the point of the visual editor revolt. A couple > of > >>> people here have tried to explain that to you, politely. And you're > >>> persisting with your idée fixe. > >>> > >>> There were two parts to the visual editor catastrophe, actually. The > >>> product wasn't ready for anyone to use. Not veteran editors. Not > newbies. > >>> Newbies who used it were less likely to successfully complete an edit. > It > >>> was broken, and the WMF insisted we had to use it. > >>> > >>> The second part of the problem was arrogance. Yes, a few editors were > >>> unnecessarily rude about the product and the developers. But then most > of > >>> the developers and tech staff who dealt with the community arrogantly > >>> characterised *anyone* who complained about the product as an ignorant, > >>> selfish Ludite - and you're persisting with that characterisation now. > >>> > >>> The WMF under Lila has learned the lessons from that, and they have > >>> fostered a much healthier relationship between the developers and the > >>> community. You clearly haven't learned all you might have. > >>> > >>> In fact, reading the arrogant responses from you here and in the > >> concurrent > >>> thread titled "How to disseminate free knowledge," and from Denny in > >>> earlier threads addressing criticism of WikiData, it seems to me there > is > >>> still a significant arrogance problem that needs addressing, at least > >> over > >>> at WikiData. > >>> > >>> Some people may approach you arrogantly, maybe even insultingly, about > an > >>> innovation, and I suppose you might be justified in talking down to > them > >> or > >>> ridiculing them (though I advise against it.). But if you can't > >> distinguish > >>> them from those who approach you with genuine concerns and well-founded > >>> criticisms, then no matter how clever you think your technical > solutions > >>> are, you will soon find you're no more welcome here than those WMF > >> staffers > >>> who thought insulting well-meaning critics was a good career move. > >>> > >>> Denny's contemptuous dismissal of valid criticisms of his project, and > >> your > >>> contemptuous dismissal of the valid criticisms of the early visual > editor > >>> and its launch are both very disappointing. > >>> > >>> Anthony Cole > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Magnus Manske < > >>> magnusman...@googlemail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> The iPhone was a commercial success because it let you do the basic > >>>> functions easily and intuitively, and looked shiny at the same time. > We > >>> do > >>>> not charge a price; our "win" comes by people using our product. If we > >>> can > >>>> present the product in such a way that more people use it, it is a > >>> success > >>>> for us. > >>>> > >>>> I do stand by my example :-) > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:37 PM Michael Peel <em...@mikepeel.net> > >>> wrote: > >>>>>> On 18 Jan 2016, at 22:35, Magnus Manske < > >> magnusman...@googlemail.com > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>> As one can be overly conservative, one can also be overly > >>>> enthusiastic. I > >>>>>> would hope the Foundation by now understands better how to handle > >> new > >>>>>> software releases. Apple here shows the way: Basic functionality, > >> but > >>>>>> working smoothly first. > >>>>> But at a huge cost premium? I'm not sure that's a good example to > >> make > >>>>> here. :-/ > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks, > >>>>> Mike > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > >>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > >>>>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.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 > >>>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.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 > >>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.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 > >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.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 > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.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 > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.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 New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
