A new communication channel to improve transparency

[Sergio Manzi]

As asked by Jessica Dunbar I'm opening this new thread to discuss my request to open a new communication channel to improve transparency in the management of the Joomla! community communications.

This is a request I expressed (amongst many other concerns) in the "Content publishing bug" thread of this Google Group: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/joomla-dev-cms/d1zkjLjA1a8

The thread was about different technical matters, but then things have gone awry because of the announcement of the Joomla4 working group that slipped in and then... all the rest.

Sergio

[Webdongle Elgnodbew]

Pointless because you would then have to announce it in the normal channels. And when the announcement was seen by users then it would show there is no need for yet another channel.

[Sergio Manzi]

We can announce it in many channels:

• All already active Google Groups
• The forum
• joomla.org home page
• Volunteers portal home page
• Joomla magazine
• The Joomla User Groups portal (a.k.a. The Joomla! Community Portal ™)

People will know...

[Michael Babker]

My overtaxed two cents.

Can we consolidate the bajillion and three hundred thousand channels we do have without adding yet another?  It's the same gripe I have about the 40 something active Joomla installs on joomla.org.

Joomla's communication sucks.  Too many channels, too much disconnect.  Unless part of the strategy for fixing that includes adding a new channel for the purpose you describe, I'd seriously like to not add yet another channel right now.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/joomla-dev-cms.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Hannes Papenberg]

+1

[Sergio Manzi]

Yes, Michael (and Hannes as I've seen you've given a +1), in my mind it is part of a strategy:

What we always bitch about (for good reasons, IMHO) is the lack of transparency by the LTs (and OSM, I'll add...)

So the first request, even before a new channel, is that all Joomla! bodies be required to make announcement of "facts" affecting the community life, and that this announcements will be made so that they reach the community at large, instantly, and not "published" somewhere where only by chance someone can stumble upon them. This is transparency.

I have given some examples like the announcement of the motion about the transition team (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/joomla-leadership/wX1YYLN3lKY) and of course the birth of the J4 WG which was already on the volunteers portal but apparently very few did know about.

How most have come to the knowledge of those facts? This mailing list: I'm pretty sure about that!

Mailing list are by far (especially in this mobile-connected world) the best method to be connected (unless you want to go to such things like Facebook and the likes, which I personally hate).

The forum is totally unusable on a mobile device and, as I've already underlined in the original thread, it is not push technology.

Google Groups do work: we have plenty of evidence of that, and we (as a community) use them daily. So why in the world we should not use them for community related announcements and discussion?

Now, the request is for a new Google Group, "Joomla Community", and to me this seems quite logical and easy to implement.

If a new group is unacceptable (but why??) we could use this Google Group, but IMHO this will not be an optimal solution

Friendly,

Sergio

[Michael Babker]

What is missing from the forum aside from the lack of a responsive layout and push technology?  That platform IMO is exactly what your proposed Joomla Community mailing list is.

Just shooting from the hip, we already have more channels than I care to keep count of anymore:

Google Groups:

- CMS Development Mailing List

- Framework Development Mailing List

- General Development Mailing List

- GSoC Mailing List

- Joomla Leadership Mailing List

- Joomla Community Working Group Mailing List

- Joomla Production Working Group Mailing List

Websites:

- www.

- community.

- developer.

- forum.

- issues. (basically an alias to GitHub)

- volunteers.

- magazine.

- extensions. (ya they too run their own blog now)

- vel.

Social Media:

- Facebook

- Google+

- Twitter

- LinkedIn

RSS Feeds:

- Joomla Connect (an aggregation of a lot of random stuff)

- The list at http://www.joomla.org/rss.html (30 separate feeds)

So now we're at a few dozen resources where one has to subscribe to find any relevant information.  And good luck searching for stuff.  Have you tried going to any site other than developer.joomla.org and searching for information on Joomla 3.5?  You won't find it in a .org site because we have so many separate installs and the search only works for the site you're on.

This is why I'm wholeheartedly against adding more sites (ironic since I'm working with a group on the site replacing JoomlaCode for at least the core project's stuff) or communication channels to Joomla.  We have a metric crapton of resources any interested party is expected to follow if they want to find relevant information.  WHY!?

[Jessica Dunbar]

Sergio,
Your intrusive questioning is disruptive and unproductive. We could have 7 blog posts tutorials, and more. instead we are all going in circles arguing with you.

First let's get transparency restored with you.

Did Michael and the rest of PLT answer your Joomla 4 working group questions timely and efficiently?

[Sergio Manzi]

Hi Michael!

On 2015-06-17 01:29, Michael Babker wrote:

What is missing from the forum aside from the lack of a responsive layout and push technology?  That platform IMO is exactly what your proposed Joomla Community mailing list is.

It miss that it is not push and it is not responsive.  :-)
Push, if you've read my rationale, is of paramount importance.

Just shooting from the hip, we already have more channels than I care to keep count of anymore:

...

This is why I'm wholeheartedly against adding more sites (ironic since I'm working with a group on the site replacing JoomlaCode for at least the core project's stuff) or communication channels to Joomla.  We have a metric crapton of resources any interested party is expected to follow if they want to find relevant information.  WHY!?

I'm too against more sites, totally!

[Sergio Manzi]

It's not about J4 WG, Jessica.

[Jessica Dunbar]

You keep mentioning it over and over in a seemingly unforgiving way. I'm about to get the UX team up and going again so I want to know your expectations upfront.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Joomla! CMS Development" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to joomla-dev-cm...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send an email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.

[Sergio Manzi]

It started from there, but then J4WG was just an example: you probably should read the whole original thread.
J4WG was minutiae...

To post to this group, send email to joomla-...@googlegroups.com.

[Jessica Dunbar]

Are you now questioning whether I read your comments. Yes.
my time is spent best elsewhere, and I hope others stop wasting time as well.

[Leo Lammeirnk]

+1 to Michael as well. Too many groups and channels. As agreed with others here completely useless to add even more

Leo

[Niv Froehlich]

@ Sergio - when you have a moment, kindly visit http://forum.joomla.org/viewtopic.php?f=704&t=888437

This is a forum topic on the adoption of the New Structure and Methodology.

I am in agreement that we have too many channels - I hope the forum will suffice, despite any shortcomings (sorry to disagree with you here).

I don't see that you should be getting any flack for making suggestions or asking, though :-) - that's unfortunate.

You've come to many of the same conclusions - and IMHO, hit the nail on the head with some key issues - so it's nice to see that others care about these issues - and think the same way.

I wonder, for example, why people who have contributed code and signed contributor agreements have yet to be made voting members of OSM - the same section of the by-laws we've both now quoted dictate that this ought to have happened...but it's still not happening for reasons unexplained and unknown to us - I feel we have every right to ask.

I'm personally hoping the discussion continues on the forum at the above link...amicably :-).

Jessica, I'm not sure why you've taken such offence to Sergio's comments, questions and concerns - and I'm sorry that you have - but these questions do matter a great deal to us.

Is it your position that people who have contributed code (as an example of a group of contributors) should continue to be be barred from membership and electing OSM Directors?

I have to say that despite these frustrations - I feel so privileged and grateful to be a part of this community and for all the brilliant people who work so hard and have contributed so much - it is out of respect for these people that I would not characterize, as you have, these discussions to be a 'waste of time,' - but rather a way to ensure that the contributors to the Joomla Project are treated as fairly as possible. 

In this context, and with respect and courtesy to you, I wonder what your answer to my question would be - would you kindly oblige me?

Niv

[Webdongle Elgnodbew]

Duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

That was my whole point ... if you announce it on all those channels then it proves another channel is superfluous

[Sergio Manzi]

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaarghhhhhh!  :-)

You announce on many channels the creation of the community channel, and from that point in time onward you just use the the (push) community channel for community related announcement.
That was my intention...

But don't worry, apparently I'm alone...

Cheers!

Sergio

[Ronni Christiansen]

Communication has never been as transparent as now - why?

1) The new volunteer portal has an overview of all working groups / teams including list of members, info on how to join, reports from the work they do.

For every individual you can see all teams they are part of and which role they have.

Teams are changed to consist of Roles that are Applied for and filled out - so a team consist of Roles and not Persons.

Once a person leaves the vacant position will be posted on the Volunteer portal so people can apply for it.

2) GLIP - Every contributor / working group member of Joomla can join GLIP - We have up to 5000 free accounts in our sponsorship from GLIP - we have not even used 500 yet

All working groups / teams should have a public and a private channel on GLIP - the public one is important to allow any one to seek them out and ask questions etc. while the private one is used for meetings etc. and day to day operation within the given team.

3) The coming structure reforms will mean that ANYONE on the planet that is a part of Joomla can join their national team in the 7th department for Local Communities and there vote for a team leader and that team leader will have voting rights for OSM Board of Director for the 7th Department as well as for the 4 Officers (President, Vice President, Treasurer and Secretary)

4) Onboarding everyone at the local level should make the path to go from local to global considerably easier and make it a clear an open process to all because:

   a) They can see all of the organizational structure

   b) They can see the positions / roles of all teams and all teams
   c) All open positions in teams will be posted to the volunteers portal and they can apply

   d) Anyone can contribute to a team even if not a yet in a team member position
  
5) GLIP is a communication hub - not a channel - it integrates and interacts with everything else thats ongoing - from project management over tasks and todos etc. the many integrations is what makes it a hub and not a channel.

6) All major information is posted to the Leadership Blog

7) More than ever leadership is using public mailing lists to debate and vote

So while we agree the journey is not done yet - id go as far as to say that it has never been better and the coming years time while what i write about above settles in and becomes the norm we will see that :)

I truely believe we are on a path that will expand our contribution base more than ever because we have structures to asure onboarding and inclusion at all levels.

[Niv Froehlich]

Ronnie,

That response is impressive. 

Nicely done!

Niv

--

[Sergio Manzi]

Ronni,

thanks for the extensive answer.

I'm, anyway afraid there is a basic misunderstanding: my proposal is not meant to create transparency, but to improve it. I continue to be firmly convinced that brief push-type announcements (à-la-Twitter) on a mailing list is the best way to get to the community at large. Members will then be able to get more information from all the places you have cited. And, please, once more, my proposal doesn't imply any criticism to what has been done up to this point.

You said that less than 500 Joomlers have joined GLIP. May I ask you also how many unique visitors the volunteer portal has daily/weekly and how many community members have subscribed to this list and to the joomla-dev-general mailing list?

Best regards,

Sergio

[brian teeman]

On Thursday, 18 June 2015 15:26:49 UTC+1, Sergio Manzi wrote:

You said that less than 500 Joomlers have joined GLIP. May I ask you also how many unique visitors the volunteer portal has daily/weekly and how many community members have subscribed to this list and to the joomla-dev-general mailing list?

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!aboutgroup/joomla-dev-cms 2677

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!aboutgroup/joomla-dev-general  3713

[Sergio Manzi]

Thanks for the interesting numbers, Brian!

I didn't know that information was publicly available: great to know about the Google's #!aboutgroup URLs!

[brian teeman]

On Thursday, 18 June 2015 17:32:18 UTC+1, Sergio Manzi wrote:

Thanks for the interesting numbers, Brian!

I didn't know that information was publicly available: great to know about the Google's #!aboutgroup URLs!

Its not hidden the link is at the top of the web page

[Sergio Manzi]

Maybe Michael have the portals access statistics...

Also the form members numbers could be an interesting info, although that's maybe influenced by the presence of occasional "users" looking for help and not so much interested in Joomla! development and/or community matters.

On 2015-06-18 18:38, brian teeman wrote:

On Thursday, 18 June 2015 17:32:18 UTC+1, Sergio Manzi wrote:

Thanks for the interesting numbers, Brian!

I didn't know that information was publicly available: great to know about the Google's #!aboutgroup URLs!

Its not hidden the link is at the top of the web page

Yeah, now I see... I simply never noticed that as I'm normally not logged into Google when I browse around...

[Sergio Manzi]

form = forum, of course! sorry for the typo...

[Michael Babker]

Nope.  I don't have access to any of the analytics data nor am I an admin on many of the Joomla web properties.

--

[George Wilson]

Also the form members numbers could be an interesting info, although that's maybe influenced by the presence of occasional "users" looking for help and not so much interested in Joomla! development and/or community matters.

I think the number of people on the General Development list of generally doing a similar purpose to the forum - looking for help with extension building etc. I'd also note the CMS list has been around for a lot longer than the volunteer portal - so trying to work out the number of ACTIVE users is a different matter for both CMS and General list (thinking of the timescale of the volunteer portal).

FWIW according to the statistics on the forum Total members 670079. So believe of that what you want :P

Kind Regards,

George

[Sergio Manzi]

hi!

I suspected something like that, but not that high... sixhundredseventythousandseventynine? impressive!!

Kind Regards,

George

--