discuss: the good the bad and the ugly
Subject:
Re: the good the bad and the ugly
From:
"Rodolfo J. Paiz" ####@####.####
Date:
21 Nov 2003 04:50:40 -0000
Message-Id: <6.0.0.22.0.20031120223351.02530db0@mail.simpaticus.com>
At 22:29 11/20/2003, David Horton wrote:
>In other words...
>
>TLDP has a wiki system that you *may* want to use for your howto. If you
>would like to set this up please email ####@####.#### If you already
>have another way of soliciting feedback from readers, that's fine, we
>won't confuse people by nailing a wiki to your howto.
I have no problem with your reasoning.
As I keep repeating, I just got here. I speak for no one but myself, and on
issues like this I am exploring the topic so as to make up my own mind and
create an opinion... I don't even _have_ an opinion on a lot of things yet,
or I am still formulating one. Having said that, some of my rambling
thoughts...
1. A key issue is who determines how the LDP site and the HOWTOs
it hosts can best serve its users. If the author is king and master of his
HOWTO and the LDP should always respect his/her wishes, then such an idea
as the wiki _must_, clearly, be an option for each and every author since,
as you rightly reason, suggestion boxes are not much use in either good or
bad extremes. If, however, the author owns his/her HOWTO but the LDP wishes
to pursue its own interests in capturing user feedback about the HOWTO,
then perhaps the wiki serves one purpose and the author-designated
communication mechanisms serve another.
2. The author wants his/her HOWTO to be widely read and useful to
its readers. In many cases, the author also wants simply to have docs
included in LDP since there is some prestige associated with being an
LDP-accepted author. However, the author may not have the knowledge (about
the subject or about writing in general) to make a good doc no matter how
hard he/she tries. The LDP wants docs to be really good docs but doesn't
have the knowledge or resources to make sure all docs are up to its
standards. I see that these two parties mostly have the same objectives,
but sometimes they cross and conflict. How do conflicts such as "my doc is
great" vs "your doc needs review, it's awful" get resolved? This should
have a concrete answer in EVERY community... this one is no exception.
3. Is there a way for wiki software to email any changes made to
an author? This might resolve some negatives for authors like yourself.
4. Can someone comment on whether the wiki could/should be
optional for any/all HOWTO documents?
5. Is there some sort of a requirement for communication to/from
an author? To use David's analogy, o we know if the restaurant is awful and
the guy ignores his customers? Is there any way for us to hear about it? If
not, maybe the wiki could have a page for comments on the author, the
HOWTO, etc. for the benefit of LDP staff, and another for suggested changes
and edits which would be optional if the author desired it? (Just thinking
out loud here...)
I realize none of this is black-and-white, guys (and gals). But let's not
argue too much, OK? Anything you don't like, say so... but take it upon
yourself to note what is bad about it and find a way to fix it as well.
Always move forward towards a solution we can implement, never go round and
round in circles.
Cheers,
--
Rodolfo J. Paiz
####@####.####
