The reply appears to have disappeared into a black hole. -------- 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 13:26:31 +0100 > > On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 10:07 +0200, Lars Weiler wrote: > > Congratulations. I just unsubscribed from the > > gwn-feedback-alias after reading your mail. > > > > * Christel Dahlskjaer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [06/06/10 04:28 +0100]: > > > 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. > > > > Several times Kurt or I took over the job of publicing the > > GWN when Ulrich asked us. So, there is a backup, but he > > didn't asked for this week. > > I am glad to hear that backup has been used in the past, and I hope that > it will be again. > > > > 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). > > > > > > 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). > > > > And I expect the same from you. You should ask the affected > > people first before starting a discussion about them on our > > public mailing lists. This is a device I can give you for > > further userrelations-activities. > > I have actually contacted Ulrich on several occasions, he chose not to > get back to me. And I have spoken a fair bit with Patrick, and from > speaking with Patrick it is quite obvious that the GWN could do with > some help, and I am hoping that my addressing the problems we can pool > together and find ways of helping them. > > > > 4. Credit. Care should be taken to ensure that crrect credit is given. > > > > It is. Either as "Author" or "Contributor". > > Or it is totally lacking, like in the above mentioned blog scenario. > > > > 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. > > > > It's quite interesting to see, that the GWN and also > > Debian's Weekly Newsletter is run by Germans mostly. Is > > there a problem with native speakers to run a periodically > > newsletter for a long time (> 3 years)? > > No, there isn't a problem with it. However, as I understand it the GWN > is translated into N languages, and I would presume the german version > to be the one which reads better. Could it be an idea to have someone > whos first language is English look over and improve upon the English > version? I know we already dot the i's and cross the t's, maybe it would > be of benefit if someone worked a bit on how it flows. > > > > 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. > > > > Subscribe to the gwn-feedback-alias and read or comment the > > submissions to the GWN. Make sure that every user will > > receive and answer. And forward questions to the > > arch-teams. Isn't that userrel's job? I didn't saw your > > contributions there yet. > > I wasn't aware the gwn-feedback alias was public, if it is then I would > be more than happy to subscribe to it and read and comment to every > user. Would I be stepping on anyones toes by doing so? And if the GWN > would like to off-load some stuff onto Userrel, then userrel would be > more than happy to help. We already have a GWN representative and he > knows that several of the userrel team would jump at the chance to help > out with various GWN related bits.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
