RE: Where'd the FAQ webpage go?

From: Popkin, Laird (WMG Corp) <"Popkin,>
Date: Mon Jan 12 2004 - 12:37:55 CST

Comments below in <laird>tags</laird>.

-----Original Message-----
From: Karl Auerbach [mailto:karl_at_cavebear_dot_com]
Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 9:30 PM
To: Popkin, Laird (WMG Corp)
Cc: 'voting-project@lists.sonic.net'
Subject: RE: Where'd the FAQ webpage go?

On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Popkin, Laird (WMG Corp) wrote:

> As far as the web site goes, I have a few questions:

> - Should we move everything to a single server? We can leave them
> separate, but it's a bit harder to manage.

I like the idea of the sources being on sourceforge. It makes it feel
like a "real" open source body of code.

<laird>Sorry if I was imprecise -- I was talking about collecting the web
pages, Wiki, FAQ, etc., running on openvoting.com, openvoting.org, etc.,
onto a single server for ease of management going forward. I certainly agree
with you that the software project should remain on SF.net.</laird>

> - Do we want to use Drupal for Content Management?

Well, my perspective is that prime objective is to getting a demo in place
not in building a community for discussion. So I'm not all that keen on
deploying groupware things that don't contribute directly to the demo.

<laird>I agree with those priorities. The thinking behind setting up a CMS
is not about community building, but that it'll allow the non-technical
folks to more easily post updates to the site, because they won't have to
ask a technical person to make the changes. With a CMS, anyone (with
permission) can add new news stories, update the FAQ, etc., fairly easily
using a web browser, so it should be _easier_ to update the site than it is
now. And since Alan has mentioned to me several times that he wants changes
to the site that take time to get someone to implement, I think it's
probably a good idea to allow him (or other interested parties) to update
the site themselevs.

Of course, other aspects of the site can help us do the work -- mailing
lists, Wiki, etc., are all tools for us to do work, and aren't intended
(primarily) for external communications.</laird>

One of the aspects with which I am concerned is the image that we project.

My sense is that the audience we need to convince is composed of people
whose expertise isn't usually founded in computer technology. From my
ICANN experience I'd suggest that the best mode of interacting with, and
persuading, these people is through more traditional and more conservative
modes - well thought out and concise papers and direct contacts with
principals or staff.

<laird>I certainly agree.</laird>

My sense is that we ought to strive to appear as conservative, thoughtful,
and without poltical bias. And I have a fear that if our network presence
on the world wide web reflects a collection of advanced groupware tools
that we might detract from that image and inherit the (incorrect)
perception that we are really noisy hirsute techies.

<laird>I agree. That's one of the reasons that I pushed Alan to bring on
board someone with some design talent, so that we could make our online
presence a high-quality, integrated site rather than an extremely primitive
site with a collection of random tools (which is where it is now).

What we need, IMO, are:
1) Agree on an OVC branding (logo, design style, etc.) that we can apply to
the web site, PDF and printed documents, etc. This doesn't need to be
elaborate -- is the current site what we want everything to look like? I
think it's a little primitive...
2) Make some decisions about what we're implementing and how. So far we have
a Wiki for working out and documenting some complex internal issues
(security, ballot resolution, bylaws), a FAQ engine for capturing people's
questions and answering them (with 31 items in it so far), and a test
install of a Content Management System (with everything from the current
site copied into it). I think that they're all in pretty good shape on the
technical front, and are pretty well primed with content.
3) Decide whether the Wiki is a public or private site.

Assuming that we're happy with those tools (how do we make that decision?) I
think we need to get them ready for prime time. That is:
3) Pick a server to hold everything.
4) Move Drupal, Wiki and FAQ engine to that server.
5) Update Drupal look & feel
6) Update Drupal content to replace current site.
7) Update Wiki look & feel (unless it's purely private)
8) Update FAQ look & feel
9) Cross-link the site (Drupal), FAQ, and (if it's public) Wiki.
10) Final review of the new site.
11) Publish new IP address to DNS.

</laird>

                --karl--

==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Mon Jan 10 00:48:09 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Jan 10 2005 - 00:48:14 CST