[OT] - Requesting Comments for Process Definition and Presentation
Ilias Lazaridis
-
I would like to ask for feedback on the Process Definition and Presentation.
Essentially this is exactly what I've myself specialized to do.
But I cannot apply the process to my own system.
I ask here, as I have criticized those 2 groups publically - and would
like to give the possibility to reverse the criticism - again publically.
-
Please simply visit
http//:lazaridis.com
what do you like?
what do you dislike?
are there points that you do not understand?
do you have any suggestions for terminology changes?
do you have any other suggestion (marketing, presentation, etc.)?
-
You can use private email, the anonymous contact-form on the website and
of course this medium here (c.l.p / c.l.r).
Your feedback is _very_ important to me.
Greetings!
.
Claudio Grondi
> comp.lang.python / comp.lang.ruby
>
> -
>
> I would like to ask for feedback on the Process Definition and
> Presentation.
>
> Essentially this is exactly what I've myself specialized to do.
>
> But I cannot apply the process to my own system.
>
> I ask here, as I have criticized those 2 groups publically - and would
> like to give the possibility to reverse the criticism - again publically.
>
> -
>
> Please simply visit
>
> http//:lazaridis.com
>
> what do you like?
>
> what do you dislike?
>
> are there points that you do not understand?
What is the goal of your posting and the intended purpose of
http://lazaridis.com ???
I can't see anything at this site what would make sense to me.
Claudio
>
> do you have any suggestions for terminology changes?
>
> do you have any other suggestion (marketing, presentation, etc.)?
>
> -
>
> You can use private email, the anonymous contact-form on the website and
> of course this medium here (c.l.p / c.l.r).
>
> Your feedback is _very_ important to me.
>
> Greetings!
>
> ..
>
Ilias Lazaridis
> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>
>> comp.lang.python / comp.lang.ruby
>>
>> -
>>
>> I would like to ask for feedback on the Process Definition and
>> Presentation.
>>
>> Essentially this is exactly what I've myself specialized to do.
>>
>> But I cannot apply the process to my own system.
>>
>> I ask here, as I have criticized those 2 groups publically - and would
>> like to give the possibility to reverse the criticism - again publically.
>>
>> -
>>
>> Please simply visit
>>
>> http//:lazaridis.com
>>
>> what do you like?
>>
>> what do you dislike?
>>
>> are there points that you do not understand?
>
> What is the goal of your posting
a) to retrieve feedback subjecting the website in general
b) to retrieve feedback subjecting the Process Definition itself
(content of diagramms, clarity, terminology etc.)
http://lazaridis.com/efficiency/graph/index.html
> and the intended purpose of http://lazaridis.com ???
The purpose of the website is:
a) to present the company
b) to present the reengineering services
c) to present the process which is used to reengineer systems.
d) to present some of the results (e.g. public evaluations, evaluation
cases etc.)
e) to present the research work (how the process has been developed)
f) to attract inital customers (no reference customers available yet)
> I can't see anything at this site what would make sense to me.
you mean, you don't understand _anything_?
so, we have no starting point.
And it seems I've many work to do.
...
.
> Claudio
>
>> do you have any suggestions for terminology changes?
>>
>> do you have any other suggestion (marketing, presentation, etc.)?
>>
>> -
>>
>> You can use private email, the anonymous contact-form on the website
>> and of course this medium here (c.l.p / c.l.r).
>>
>> Your feedback is _very_ important to me.
>>
>> Greetings!
.
simonh
"Status
The services are available for initial Reference Customers.
Preferred Domains: Software-Development-Systems.
Preferred Projects: Open Source.
Profile
Lazaridis ReEngineering is a lightweight startup which has developed a
System Reengineering Method, based on the pragmatically defined
Independent Efficiency Management Process.
The provided services apply the Method remotely to different Systems,
with a specialization on Software Production Systems like e.g. Large
Scale Open-Source Projects or Software Companies".
The flowchart reveals nothing either.
Ilias Lazaridis
> i too am none the wiser after looking at your site:
I've documented everything very clear...
But as it looks just for myself.
Seems to become a huge problem, as I fail to rephrase this:
> "Status
>
> The services are available for initial Reference Customers.
services available = I'm not busy with a task.
There are currently no Reference Customers available (showcase for the
work I've done)
> Preferred Domains: Software-Development-Systems.
> Preferred Projects: Open Source.
I would preferred to apply the services to software-development tools
which are produced with open-source projects.
> Profile
>
> Lazaridis ReEngineering is a lightweight startup which has developed a
> System Reengineering Method, based on the pragmatically defined
> Independent Efficiency Management Process.
reading this here... it sounds somehow strange.
> The provided services apply the Method remotely to different Systems,
> with a specialization on Software Production Systems like e.g. Large
> Scale Open-Source Projects or Software Companies".
and this sounds strange, too.
> The flowchart reveals nothing either.
.
Gerard Flanagan
Hi Ilias,
I like the overall style of your site - clean layout, good colour
scheme - but there are a number of spelling and grammar errors, (eg.
'diagrams' not 'diagramms', and the past participle of 'feed' is 'fed'
not 'feeded'), which stand out to a native English speaker.
Also, your Usenet posting style is quite terse, almost like bullet
points, and your site reflects this (IMHO). Flow-charts and bulleted
lists certainly have their place, but they're a bit impersonal - maybe
some more prose would help to present your ideas better?
Having said that, parts of the site maybe have too much information.
The people to whom you want to sell your service probably don't want to
know the implementation details of this service.
"Making IT efficient" is certainly a noble aspiration, I hope you can
make it a profitable one but it'll be a tough market!
All the best
Gerard
Ilias Lazaridis
> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>
>
>>comp.lang.python / comp.lang.ruby
>>
>>-
>>
>>I would like to ask for feedback on the Process Definition and Presentation.
>>
>>Essentially this is exactly what I've myself specialized to do.
>>
>>But I cannot apply the process to my own system.
>>
>>I ask here, as I have criticized those 2 groups publically - and would
>>like to give the possibility to reverse the criticism - again publically.
> Hi Ilias,
>
> I like the overall style of your site - clean layout, good colour
> scheme -
thanks.
> but there are a number of spelling and grammar errors, (eg.
> 'diagrams' not 'diagramms', and the past participle of 'feed' is 'fed'
> not 'feeded'), which stand out to a native English speaker.
I gues I have to apply a spell-check at minimum.
> Also, your Usenet posting style is quite terse, almost like bullet
> points, and your site reflects this (IMHO).
You are right.
This is my way of managing the complexity.
> Flow-charts and bulleted
> lists certainly have their place, but they're a bit impersonal - maybe
> some more prose would help to present your ideas better?
Again you are right.
The bulleted lists are essentially used by myself to get clarity (the
effort to rearrange a bulleted list is small)
The diagrams are used to display the same structures graphically. This
way I get more clarity and rearrange the bulleted lists.
Textual descriptions (a few exist on the site) are used (_finally_ as
the effort to reflect changes is very high)to describe things more
thoroughly .
And that's where I fail mostly.
Essentially I need a native english "prose-writer" (to use your term).
> Having said that, parts of the site maybe have too much information.
> The people to whom you want to sell your service probably don't want to
> know the implementation details of this service.
I understand your thought.
I don't know if you refere to the process definition, or to the research
work.
I agree fully, that the research work (how the process has evolved)
should be not presented in the "first front", as its not of intrest for
a target customer.
So the main menue should be freed of the "cases" and the "project".
Instead, I should possibly add a "Sample" menue, where I publish some
real-life examples.
I will apply those changes in the next hours.
> "Making IT efficient" is certainly a noble aspiration, I hope you can
> make it a profitable one but it'll be a tough market!
Yes, there are many companies out there.
The customer list of this one is impressive:
http://www.hammerandco.com/about-customers.asp
But I don't think that they could reengineer e.g. an open source project
or the structures of the lisp community.
-
I have specialized myself on public systems, like e.g. open source
projects, whilst applying a method which works exclusively via internet
(written conversation).
> All the best
Thanks a lot!
I've gained many things through your feedback!
> Gerard
.
Xavier Morel
> b) to retrieve feedback subjecting the Process Definition itself
> (content of diagramms, clarity, terminology etc.)
>
You are merely some kind of strange troll. You've built something that
you consider the only "object model" worth using within your mind and
proceed to try bashing OO languages such as Py or Ruby because they
don't fit your own object model and terminology.
No one in either c.l.p or c.l.r need you, no one wants your object
model, no one wants your so-called evaluations (especially about the
community leaders, your various comments about both Guido van Rossum and
Yukihiro "Matz" Matsumoto are insulting and disrespectful), please do
everyone a favor: create your damn own language, or head over to
comp.lang.lisp and implement your object model in this language, Lisp is
a meta-language and _nothing_ stops you from heading over and creating a
new object model from scratch (that's been done countless times anyway,
and the CLOS probably wouldn't fit your personal object model, so go ahead).
The fact is that you don't live in reality, you generate more buzzwords
and empty acronyms than a well-trained marketroid, but guess what? that
doesn't matter, unless you can prove that what you advocate _works_.
And you can't.
Both Ruby's object model and Py's object models work. They have flaws,
they evolve, they grow and change, but they work, they are used in real
world situations and they fit the needs of their respective communities.
"Ilias Lazaridis Majic Object Model" doesn't. Period.
Just stop posting altogether, implement your damn blasted object model
(or try to) in an existing language or create a new language to
implement it and just leave us.
And stop spamming your damn worthless website too. Thank you very much.
>> I can't see anything at this site what would make sense to me.
>
> you mean, you don't understand _anything_?
>
No, he means that your website just doesn't make sense. There is no
purpose, no consistency, no way to understand what the website is
supposed to hold, no way to find *informations* (and your colorful
graphs with an informative level of somewhere below 0 do not count as
information BTW).
I'll add that the color/style schemes are awfully misleading (why the
hell are random words in bold-ocre, please go read a few books on
interfaces and websites creation because you obviously don't have a clue
there, Steve Krug's "Don't Make Me Think" would be a much required
start), that the various categories are unclear, fuzzy and *never
explained anywhere* and that you claiming that you can *review websites*
(for a fee on top of that) is insulting to people with actual skills in
the field.
Gene Tani
Xavier Morel wrote:
> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> > b) to retrieve feedback subjecting the Process Definition itself
> > (content of diagramms, clarity, terminology etc.)
> >
> This is a lie, and you know it.
I've said it before, i'll say it again; medical insurance premiums
should be lower for people who know how to use killfiles.
Ilias Lazaridis
> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>
>> b) to retrieve feedback subjecting the Process Definition itself
>> (content of diagramms, clarity, terminology etc.)
>
note to readers: most of the comments are answered within those sections:
http://lazaridis.com/core/index.html
http://lazaridis.com/core/eval/index.html
>>> I can't see anything at this site what would make sense to me.
>>
>> you mean, you don't understand _anything_?
>>
> No, he means that your website just doesn't make sense.
I have understood this. that's why I wrote:
"And it seems I've many work to do. "
> There is no
> purpose, no consistency, no way to understand what the website is
> supposed to hold, no way to find *informations* (and your colorful
> graphs with an informative level of somewhere below 0 do not count as
> information BTW).
=> missing purpose and consistency
=> missing way to understand main scope of website.
=> missing way to find informations
=> graphs have no information value
> I'll add that the color/style schemes are awfully misleading (why the
> hell are random words in bold-ocre, please go read a few books on
=> avoid bold-ocre
> interfaces and websites creation because you obviously don't have a clue
> there, Steve Krug's "Don't Make Me Think" would be a much required
=> Book suggestion "Steve Krug's - Don't Make Me Think"
I operate based on public available resources.
> start), that the various categories are unclear, fuzzy and *never
> explained anywhere*
=> categories are unclear & fuzzy
=> missing explanations for categories
> and that you claiming that you can *review websites*
> (for a fee on top of that) is insulting to people with actual skills in
> the field.
from the inital message:
"
I would like to ask for feedback on the Process Definition and Presentation.
Essentially this is exactly what I've myself specialized to do.
But I cannot apply the process to my own system.
"
-
Thank you for your feedback.
-
TAG.evolution.criticism.harsh
.
Ilias Lazaridis
> comp.lang.python / comp.lang.ruby
>
> -
>
> I would like to ask for feedback on the Process Definition and
> Presentation.
>
> Essentially this is exactly what I've myself specialized to do.
>
> But I cannot apply the process to my own system.
> Your feedback is _very_ important to me.
Based on the summary of the feedback so far, I've focused on one page -
the main page:
Although it needs a review from a native english speaker, I think that
this should give now a clear summary, without forcing the reader to
think very much:
-
"
Lazaridis ReEngineering is specialized on System Evaluation and
Reengineering
We can assist you to find your strenghts & weaknesses, your
opportunities & threats.
We can assist you to find the neccessary changes and the simplest ways
to implement those changes with minimal effort.
Suggested changes are mostly demonstrated with comparisons or samples.
Theory involvement is avoided whenever possible. This way you can verify
change suggestion with a minimal time investment.
We apply a method which works via internet. This method is based
exclusively on written conversation and is very pragmatic.
Our services are specialized on software-companies. The services use a
top-down approach which starts from the website, goes to the product,
the support, the project and can reach the source codes, especially
within open source projects. The prices for our services start at 250,- €.
We offer a no-cost / no-obligation review of your website. This is the
simplest way to introduce yourself to our services and to verify our skills.
Just try it - you have nothing to loose!
Request it via e-mail or via contact form.
"
-
Any comments or suggestions are welcome.
.
Ilias Lazaridis
Gerard Flanagan
> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> >
> > I would like to ask for feedback on the Process Definition and
> > Presentation.
> > <snip>
>>
> > Your feedback is _very_ important to me.
> >
> <snip>
>...The prices for our services start at 250,- €.
There is a spiritual issue here which I don't think you appreciate!
I'll send you some spelling corrections if I get a chance.
Here's some links (Google 'Software Compliance'):
http://www.fastcorporateservices.com/fast/projects/textandlinkslist.asp?site=1&SiteSect=8
http://www.pcprofile.com/aboutus.htm
All the best
Gerard
Ilias Lazaridis
> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>
>>Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>>
>>>I would like to ask for feedback on the Process Definition and
>>>Presentation.
>>><snip>
>>>
>>>Your feedback is _very_ important to me.
>>
>><snip>
>>...The prices for our services start at 250,- €.
>
> There is a spiritual issue here which I don't think you appreciate!
Please clarify.
Do you mean the "Asking/retrieving free feedback, whilst offering payed
services"?
> I'll send you some spelling corrections if I get a chance.
Please contact me with private email.
> Here's some links (Google 'Software Compliance'):
>
> http://www.fastcorporateservices.com/fast/projects/textandlinkslist.asp?site=1&SiteSect=8
>
> http://www.pcprofile.com/aboutus.htm
Very Intresting links.
> All the best
Steve Holden
> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>
>>
>>-
>>
>>I would like to ask for feedback on the Process Definition and
>>Presentation.
>>
>>Essentially this is exactly what I've myself specialized to do.
>>
>>But I cannot apply the process to my own system.
>
>
>
>>Your feedback is _very_ important to me.
>
>
> the main page:
>
> Although it needs a review from a native english speaker, I think that
> this should give now a clear summary, without forcing the reader to
> think very much:
>
> -
>
> "
> Lazaridis ReEngineering is specialized on System Evaluation and
> Reengineering
>
> We can assist you to find your strenghts & weaknesses, your
> opportunities & threats.
>
> We can assist you to find the neccessary changes and the simplest ways
> to implement those changes with minimal effort.
>
> Suggested changes are mostly demonstrated with comparisons or samples.
> Theory involvement is avoided whenever possible. This way you can verify
> change suggestion with a minimal time investment.
>
> We apply a method which works via internet. This method is based
> exclusively on written conversation and is very pragmatic.
>
> Our services are specialized on software-companies. The services use a
> top-down approach which starts from the website, goes to the product,
> the support, the project and can reach the source codes, especially
start at €250.
>
> We offer a no-cost / no-obligation review of your website. This is the
> simplest way to introduce yourself to our services and to verify our skills.
>
> Just try it - you have nothing to loose!
>
> Request it via e-mail or via contact form.
> "
>
> -
>
> Any comments or suggestions are welcome.
>
> .
>
regards
Steve
--
Steve Holden +44 150 684 7255 +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC www.holdenweb.com
PyCon TX 2006 www.python.org/pycon/
Ilias Lazaridis
> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>> Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
>>> comp.lang.python / comp.lang.ruby
>>>
>>> Presentation.
>> Based on the summary of the feedback so far, I've focused on one page
>> - the main page:
>>
>> Although it needs a review from a native english speaker, I think that
>> this should give now a clear summary, without forcing the reader to
>> think very much:
>>
>> "
>> Lazaridis ReEngineering is specialized on System Evaluation and
>> Reengineering
[...]
>> Our services are specialized on software-companies. The services use a
>
> for software developers and vendors.
[...]
Our services are specialized for the business domain "software development"
> It certainly reads more like I'd be talking to a human being now.
Very nice.
Thank you for your gentle corrections (i've applied all, exept the one
above).
> regards
> Steve
.