[documentation] Contributors to docs need more public recognition

[Shai Gluskin]

Steve,

I think you are interpreting my passion about this topic as being aimed at
you. It's not aimed at you personally. But your role as a decision making
leader in the Drupal community, which means you make decisions that affect
the lives of others and their motivation to participate in Drupal, means
that you will take heat at times. If there is any way that you think I've
been disrespectful, please advise. When I say you should expect heat, I
don't think anyone has the right to put forth ideas in a disrespectful
manner. I appreciate what you do for Drupal now and in the past. I think
that facing folks who disagree with your opinion/approach is part of what it
means to be a leader who is accountable.

@steve-p: "My focus is on the active contributing Drupal user community."
... "If you or anyone else continues to claim I said or think end users are
bad I will get really irritated.  I said I wasn't interested in people who
did not participate in our community.  I'm not."

Steve, I'm not questioning your authority at all. I wrote in an earlier post
that Drupal is not democratic. I'm fine with that. But I do think your
ability to lead is undermined by justifying a policy decision based on what
*your *focus is and what *your* interest is.

@steve-p: "At no point did I say anonymous users were bad."

Okay, I was interpreting the word "outsider," which in many cultures has a
negative connotation. But let's just stick with your word: you said were not
*interested* in them. Anonymous users are potential
users/promoters/contributors to the Drupal project. I think those are the
folks who we should target for "converting" into registered users. It's our
job, in my opinion, to interest them, *before* they have registered. I think
a revisions tab for anonymous users makes Drupal more interesting and
appealing.

Regarding my example of Dries' description of what happened at U of M: My
point has nothing to do with the specifics of what came out of UM. It has to
do with Dries as a leader; how he was setting an example for us as a
community. Drupal.org and its policies set an example that communicates what
Drupal is about. I want to follow Dries' lead of being honest and open. The
revisions tab is a small but meaningful way we can communicate that to those
not yet on board with Drupal.

@steve-p: "Define end user better."

Anyone who uses Drupal. From the person who shows up as a user on Sony's
"MyPlay" site or "The Onion" to an office manager at a non-profit looking
for a CMS to upgrade their web site...  and many many more.  I felt that
Dries spoke in grand terms at DrupalCon Boston. He was talking about Drupal
making a big impact. That means reaching out.

@steve-p: "Several times in this thread people mentioned 'no one can figure
out how to help' already but I have received no response to the fact that it
is the very first paragraph on the /handbooks page and how to make that more
visible."

Steve: That's not particularly my issue. But I think it speaks to the fact
fact that effectiveness is not always achieved via page placement. The
open-source process in wonderful and it's chaotic. Drupal is a moving target
because of its commitment to growth and change, which can make things harder
as well. Much isn't easy. I think if people are expressing consternation at
not knowing how to help, I think that data needs to be received at face
value, with curiosity.

@steve-p: "One assumes ... trying to hide secrets? Why on earth would you
ever assume that? What a horrible way to live. It also assume facts not in
evidence. No user I have chatted with in real life or irc has ever mentioned
that they thought that some mysterious 'we' were trying to hide secrets.
Also, why would you not create an account if you were evaluating whether or
not you were going to invest time in teaching something?"

Steve, I'm not talking about stuff that is particularly nefarious. I'm
talking about the conventioal dance of "sales." People who are selling a
home want to emphasize the good stuff, and pretty much only reveal what is
legally, and maybe morally, obligating them about the bad stuff. It's left
up to the buyers to try to uncover/imagine, what might be the bad stuff. Or
in the case of proprietary software, the code is, literally, a secret. You
have to rely on other end-user experiences - you can't snoop under the hood
of the code at all.

Open source is different. All I'm saying is that we should provide as much
tangible evidence that we can to *show* users what an open-source approach
is all about. I think that the documentation area is a more likely place
that an office manager or similar non-developer will snoop around. They
aren't going to peek into CVS. I'm not suggesting there are real secrets in
the revisions tab. I'm saying it paints Drupal and its "process" in a very
favorable light for an anonymous user to be able to see a bit inside the
belly of Drupal.

Why wouldn't someone create an account? People don't like creating accounts.
Passwords, confirmation e-mails, user names, etc. People are overwhelmed. In
an initial review of CMS possibilities a typical decision-maker might have 6
CMSs on his/her short list. We need to make a first impression. I think the
burden should be on us to make d.o. and Drupal attractive enough that
they'll overcome that hurdle.

Shai
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.drupal.org/pipermail/documentation/attachments/20080527/efcd6c0c/attachment-0001.htm