David Gerard wrote: > Discussion on Oliver Keyes' blog: > > http://quominus.org/archives/714 > > He's coming from the perspective of liaison with newbies. Read the comments. > > (I will note that Antoine Musso was right in the previous discussion > that Mantis has a nice, friendly interface. I myself was most > displeased to discover that (a) the code itself is really horrible (b) > it's all but unsupported even to free-software standards.)
Interesting post. Can probably be summed up "technical tool doesn't work well for non-techies." Film at 11. Mark H. and I have had previous discussions about generally improving user feedback tools. The Wikimedia Foundation's approach seems to largely consist of a giant feedback bar with giant colorful faces (no, seriously: <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MoodBar>). My notes on a better approach to this problem are here: <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Kvetch>. There are associated bugs scattered around as well. You quickly run into an issue of scope, though. What should be flagged as a user content issue? What's a technical or software issue? What's a legal issue? And depending on the answer, there may be vastly different areas where to stick the issues (OTRS, a talk page, a noticeboard, reference desk, help desk, Bugzilla, etc.). But a generic reusable feedback tool that doesn't treat our users like retards would be cool. Even if it just guided the user to the appropriate place. Help wizard, maybe? Dunno. MZMcBride _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
