After waiting for my replies for 24+ hours I presume they disappeared into a blackhole while we were lacking lists, so I'm resending.
-------- Forwarded Message -------- > From: Christel Dahlskjaer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org > Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item > Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:13:37 +0100 > > On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 09:27 +0200, Wernfried Haas wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 04:28:36AM +0100, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: > > > I would like to ask that the Council discuss the current state and > > > future of the GWN at their next meeting. > > > > Council? Why escalate things? Have you talked to Ulrich about the > > problems mentioned below? Isn't the GWN somehow a userrel issue? ;-) > > I have attempted, but as it happens I have never ever spoken to Ulrich > as he does not respond to my e-mails and does not frequent IRC and I > don't have his telephone number or address. And the GWN doesn't come > under Userrel, although they do have a representative within Userrel, > one whom I understand to be wanting to make some improvements to the > GWN. > > As for why the Council, because thats what people suggested when I asked > which route to take when he was unresponsive. > > > > 1. Reliability. The GWN claims to be a weekly publication, yet it > > > frequently fails to publish without prior warning. There was no edition > > > this week, and Patrick Lauer says that it is "unknown" whether there > > > will be an edition next week as Ulrich Plate is AWOL. > > > > I agree there are problems due to Ulrich being awol every now and > > then, but what can the council do about it? Fire him so the GWN is > > unmaintained? ;-) > > No. I don't want anyone fired. However, I believe that the other GWN guy > could be provided with sufficient access to make sure it goes out, and I > believe that Ulrich could give some warning when possible so that > Patrick or whomever can get it out regardless of whether Ulrich is > around or not. > > > > 2. Permissions. Although it could be considered flattering that the GWN > > > should choose a developer's blog as inspiration for an article, they > > > should ensure that they have the developer / author's permission before > > > quoting them (see previous complaints by brix, ciaranm and others). > > > > Why? What makes blog posts different to mailing list/forum threads, > > new versions being released etc? Do you want to ask people for > > permission then, too? > > If you re-read what I said I don't have an issue with the GWN or anyone > else using someones blog post as inspiration, I do however believe that > when quoting someone and writing the article in such a way that the > 'quotee' appears to have spoken to the publication you need to get some > consensus before printing. > > > > I also believe that when posting an article or interview, a copy should > > > be sent to the relevant people to ensure that they are ok with what is > > > being posted (my dev of the week interview, for example, was rather > > > screwed up and misrepresentative). When someone contacts GWN to have > > > something corrected, it would be appreciated were the GWN staff to at > > > least deign to acknowledge receipt, even if for some reason they choose > > > not to honour the corrections or post a retraction (although refusing to > > > publish corrections is extremely insulting to those wronged). > > > > Considering Ulrich is appearently still/again awol, could that be the > > reason? I have requested small fixes (like wrong email addresses in > > stuff i submitted) every now and than and got what i asked for. > > He wasn't awol at the time of my writing my first few e-mails. > > > > 3. Misinformation, misquotations and outright fabrications. Sure, > > > there's freedom of the press, but that shouldn't be used as an excuse > > > for deliberately making up quotes and printing intentional > > > misinformation. > > > > Huh? Can you back that statement up? > > To take an example, there were made up quotes in my GWN interview, > however, nothing of great harm. I believe that time it was a case of > attempting to make it more fun, it is however a worrying trend. > > > > From a PR perspective, Gentoo could benefit greatly by better > > > utilisation of the GWN. I believe that as it stands, however, the GWN is > > > discouraging people from contributing and damaging Gentoo's credibility. > > > > I have submitted a bunch of articles to the GWN, and it has always > > worked fine for me. Yes, Ulrich is awol at times and sometimes there > > are smaller corrections to make in the final article, but i never felt > > discouraged to submit my stuff. Worst case it takes a few extra days > > to get published. > > Ok. I am very glad to hear that not everyone shares the same experiences > when it comes to contributing to the GWN. > > > > Another thing that concerns me is the way the articles are written. It > > > is blatanly obvious that the GWN writers are not native English speakers > > > as both the grammar and the flow of the articles is far from attractive. > > > Having read through the archives, I notice that there was once a time > > > when the GWN was a great publication, and I would like to think that it > > > could become great yet again; in its current state, though, it is doing > > > more harm than good. > > > > I disagree. GWN could use some more manpower to improve this and that, > > but i don't see the harm - at least i could easily come up with lots > > of stuff happening that does more harm (Not pointing my finger at > > anyone and leaving it up to everyone's imagination to think of > > something that does damage Gentoo in a terrible way). > > Yes, I agree they could use more manpower. They do however claim that > they find it difficult to find someone to help and that is my motivation > for bringing up the issues I notice. If the GWN themselves can't find a > solution to the problem then I believe that the rest of us can attempt > to help them find one. > > > > Lack of content and poorly written or incorrect articles are often > > > justified by the GWN team on grounds of overwork and insufficient > > > manpower. When I asked why they were not recruiting, I was informed that > > > no-one has any interest in contributing. Upon speaking with others, > > > however, I find that this is not the case -- people are interested, but > > > fear (and rightly so) that their work will be edited in such a way that > > > it is no longer something with which they want to be associated. > > > > I'm sure a solution can be found to that problem - actually Ulrich is > > quite a nice guy to talk to, so if those people came out of hiding > > those problems may be solved by talking. > > I wouldn't know, as I said he doesn't reply to my e-mails. OTOH, I have > no reason to believe that he is not a nice guy to talk to. > > > > Another complaint is that the GWN rejects any writing style which has > > > any degree of character or levity. Any attempt at dececnt writing (the > > > kind that would make it into publication in English newspapers or > > > magazines, for example), is met with the claim that "the GWN is not a > > > humorous publication". > > > > http://www.gentoo.org/news/en/gwn/20060522-newsletter.xml#doc_chap3 > > Look at the picture and tell me it's not at least a tiny bit > > humorous. Agreed, the joke is a bit obvious. > > I can't quite see how your picture has anything to do with writing style > and character of writing. > > > > I would like to see discussion about the way the GWN is > > > (mis)representing Gentoo, how we can better actualise its full potential > > > and what can be done to address the concerns listed above. > > > > I'm still not sure why the council should discuss the issue in the > > first place, i think everyone agrees that the GWN is a bit > > understaffed (for whatever reason) and some stuff doesn't work too > > well. So i assume helping out with the GWN and helping those who fear > > it for some reason may be the best way to solve these problems. > > I am not entirely sure why the council wouldn't be a good place to start > a discussion about this. I believe that the council members will wish to > help the GWN help themselves sufficiently to solve their problems, > whether that be attempting to help them think of new ways to attract > contributors or make any other changes.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
