L. David Baron wrote:
> 
>>An observation that demonstrates that current site doesn't work for 
>>everyone: there are so many sites about Mozilla (for example 
>>mozilla-evengelism.bclary.com or mozdev.org, which hosts _documentation_ 
>>projects) that are not on mozilla.org
> 
> 
> Have you asked *why* he doesn't use mozilla.org?

No, no one has asked me but since you have brought up the issue I will 
tell you.

I originally asked [EMAIL PROTECTED] if it would be possible for 
evangelism to have a page or set of pages where we could organize and 
promote the Mozilla evangelism effort. It would be a place where we 
could post information and tools that would be appropriate for use when 
evangelizing sites. A related area I wished for was a newsgroup where 
people could discuss evangelism and suggest new ideas, and participate 
in the 'evangelism' community.

The feedback I received was essentially that Evangelism sounded too 
'kooky' or 'fanatical' and had too many associations with religion. I 
could not get a good response on even if the idea of a section on 
www.mozilla.org for evangelism was a good idea or not. It never seemed 
to get past the objection to the name.

So I gave up, spent my own money on a domain and started 
mozilla-evangelism.bclary.com.

However, this had no relation to your next point.

> 
> (At one point he proposed rewriting
> http://mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/ by splitting it into subpages
> like "Articles", "Technotes", "Demos", etc., which I didn't find useful
> for people who are looking for information.  Furthermore, most of the
> categories had only one or two links, while most of the links were in a
> small number of categories.  This also makes it hard for users to find
> things because they will get discouraged after going through the
> near-empty categories on separate pages.  (Such an organization isn't a
> problem within leaf pages, but it is a problem when the categories are
> links.)  I told him that such an organization wasn't useful because I
> didn't think it would help people find what they were looking for, but
> that he was welcome to contribute documentation into the current
> organization and that if his contributions made the current page too
> crowded, then I would consider an appropriate reorganization.  He seemed
> annoyed at not getting the privilege of reorganizing the page without
> having made any prior contributions to it, and never contributed any
> documentation.)

I came to you with what I considered to be a straw man proposal on how 
to develop more web developer documentation on www.mozilla.org. There 
were many reasons that led to my wanting to publish documentation on 
www.mozilla.org rather than developer.netscape.com which I won't go into 
here.

It is true that there were not many articles available at the time. What 
I tried to do with you was start a discussion of what would be needed 
and how to organize it in a way that would be useful to those who wanted 
to learn how to support the standards and Mozilla.

Your response was such that it did not appear that discussing the issue 
with you was worth while so I dropped it. If I was annoyed it was at the 
way you seemed to close the door on any discussion of what should be 
done. Your attitude was 'a page of links is fine until we have more 
content'.  I did not stop developing documentation for mozilla.org 
because of this. I did stop because of the time pressures of dealing 
with the other aspects of my job.

However, I am *very annoyed* at having been brought into this discussion 
and referred to in this way.  I consider your remarks derogatory and 
insulting.

You may be brilliant and have the respect and admiration of your fans. 
However, all I have to say is:

Go to Hell.

Bob Clary




Reply via email to