Re: [Dfey-nw-discuss] Re: DFEY website redesign

[Isabell Long]

On 15/07/2009, Robert Leverington <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 2009-07-15, Tim Dobson wrote:
>> Robert Leverington wrote:
>>> On 2009-07-13, Tim Dobson wrote:
>>>> Lets start with mailing lists.
>>>>
>>>> Hopefully, lists would be provided by the Savannah project,
>>>> www.nongnu.org - mailman servers are really really hard to run well
>>>> and  the guys at Savannah do a great job at making our lives as easy
>>>> as possible.
>>>>
>>>> We should be able to, on request, set up new mailing lists for new
>>>> localgroups (hopefully dfey-*-discuss format).
>>>>
>>>> I think there should be a dfey-general-discuss for general
>>>> non-geographical discussion and perhaps dfey-admin-discuss for
>>>> non-geographic administration boringness. :)
>>>
>>> This makes sense to me, maybe avoid dfey-admin-discuss for now as we are
>>> not at the stage where there is such a high volume that this is
>>> distracting.
>>
>> Hmmm. well I'm begginng to notice that the people who don't filter their
>> mail - people who use hotmail for instance - aren't really looking at
>> emails because there are so many and most of them aren't relevant for
>> people who just want to meet each other and aren't really interested in
>> getting involved in any organisation aspects.
>>
>> I think the sooner we can get administration discussions onto an opt-in
>> mailing list, the better. :)
>>
>> As mailing lists are a priority, I should really sort this ASAP.
>
> It seems to me that it would be better to separate off the e-mails about
> meetups on to separate list also in this case.  For example have
> dfey-nw-meetups, dfey-se-meetups, etc.  Perhaps in conjunction with
> dfey-admin-discuss and, of course, dfey-nw-discuss, and dfey-se-discuss.
> Under your scheme there would still have to be admin stuff for
> individual branches going to people who don't want it.

Why have dfey-nw and dfey-se meetups on separate lists?  Surely one
list, possibly named dfey-meetups would be easier for people to follow
and just put either NW or SE in the subject line?  It would keep lists
to a minimum and as, possibly, DFEY gains some other regional groups
like SW, it would be easier to keep track of than having separate
meetup mailing lists.

>
>>>> DFEY.org
>>>>
>>>> The DFEY.org home page would be fairly simplistic, concise and low on
>>>>  text content, linking one to several other main pages (again,
>>>> concise,  small amounts of text) and a "more" page containing links
>>>> other content.
>>>>
>>>> On the three main pages, perhaps we would describe DFEY, talk about
>>>> local groups and mention how you can get involved. (The last two seem
>>>>  very similar - maybe not those two!)
>>>
>>> Something simillar was discussed, but the general consensus was that
>>> there would not be sufficient content to span multiple pages - at least
>>> for the time being.  This is always something that can be added on
>>> eventually.
>>
>> There's plenty to write about!
>>
>> I mean, if I can talk about DFEY for 20+ minutes without notes, then I
>> think we can write what would amount to 1/2 a page of A4 across three
>> pages. How should people find out information about why we exist or what
>> DFEY's here for or how to get involved and help out?

You could put that information on the pages of the wiki though, people
may not want to trawl through the blog posts.
>
> This is my thought too, I was just echoing the general consensus from
> IRC.  Whatever CMS we choose will allow multiple pages so it's hardly
> difficult to implement either way once we actually have a site.
>
>>>> *.dfey.org or dfey.org/

The latter, dfey.org/northwest or dfey.org/nw or something along those lines.
>>>>
>>>> In my opinion, local groups should have their own web presence. It
>>>> shouldn't be forced, but a local DFEY group in Kent and in Glasgow,
>>>> as  much as they might all wish to meet face to face, probably aren't
>>>> going  to, and would probably like to design their own region
>>>> specific DFEY sites.

Yes, I agree with that, but it's not a priority as we only have one
established regional group and one in the process of getting together.
 Maybe when there is more interest.
>>>
>>> This is fair enough, probably something for individual groups to focus
>>> on of course.  For now I don't think this should be a priority as it can
>>> easily be added at any time.
>>
>> Absolutely, it's not a priority, but the principle is the really the bit
>> that is important.
>>
>>>> Wiki's
>>>>
>>>> I don't know about wiki's. Wiki's are great for adding ideas  to,
>>>> collaborating on stuff, planning meeting, discussing stuff...
>>>> But you have to work VERY hard to make them work as a homepage as the
>>>>  important info gets hidden in links that don't appear too be
>>>> obvious.
>>>> I can see the benefits for having a unified wiki for local groups,
>>>> but  at the same time there's a lot to be said for running one's own.
>>>>
>>>> The DFEY-NW wiki needs a cleanup; there is no doubt about that.
>>>
>>> As you say running a wiki involves a significant amount of work, and I
>>> doubt there will be people in every DFEY branch that enjoy that sort of
>>> thing.
>>
>> Running a wiki is easy. Actually tidying the wiki is the timeconsuming
>> bit. One online community I have been involved in openmoko.org actually
>> hired someone full time to cleanup the wiki, at the same time, maybe it
>> shouldn't be cleared up in DFEY's case - notes about stuff don't really
>> benefit from a 3rd party jumping in and suggesting that their page &
>> link structure is semantically wrong.
>
> As I have said, I would happily take on the role of maintaining whatever
> wiki we decide to use in terms of content (and I wouldn't exactly call
> myself a "3rd party", for what its worth).  At the moment the DFEY-NW
> wiki does not have any real structure (something I've tried to ensure
> from the start with DFEY-SE), and is a mix of outside facing content,
> and internal meta stuff.
>
>>> There is also not a huge amount of content that would be unique
>>> to each wiki.  With this in mind I think it makes sense to have a single
>>> wiki.
>>
>> Well I don't know, I think if you start looking at it from a local
>> level, then it's not necessarily desirable...
>
> As I have said, it takes a lot of effort to actually maintain a wiki and
> you need someone who is willing to spend a significant amount of time
> keeping it in order and dealing with any vandalism.  Something that
> won't neccesserily be persent in every single branch, and I've seen many
> times before wikis that are not usable at all because of this. MediaWiki
> has an enormous feature set which makes organising content in to
> different local groups quite possible.
>
>>>  There was talk about using the DFEY-SE wiki as a base for this
>>> and gradually moving content from the DFEY-NW wiki (and actually keeping
>>> it in a nice condition this time).  I'm happy for this to happen, and
>>> will gladly take responsibility for keeping it in shape, what does
>>> everyone else think?
>>
>> Maybe have it a bit like the fsf groups wiki?
>>
>> http://groups.fsf.org
>>
>> The lower bits are essentially organised but its up to you how you mess
>> up your actual patch?
>
> We can essentially do anything we want, so yes - this is possbile and
> I'd be happy to help implement it on whichever wiki we decide to
> designate as the primary one.
>
>>>> Logo's
>>>>
>>>> I imagined dfey.org using the vanilla DFEY logo and local groups
>>>> using a  template of the logo with then the region they revolve
>>>> around underneath  in text. Take a look at this page to see what I
>>>> mean.
>>>> http://nw.dfey.org/wiki/Press_resources

That is nice, I like that though maybe the North West/South East could
be centered as right aligned isn't so noticeable in my view.

-- 
Regards,
Isabell Long.  <address@hidden>
[[User:Isabell121]] on all public Wikimedia projects.