Re: Kickstarter was not successful... but it did help things...

[Doc O'Leary]

In article <mailman.6931.1385229523.10748.discuss-gnustep@gnu.org>,
 Riccardo Mottola <riccardo.mottola@libero.it> wrote:

> > I disagree.  What *should* happen is an old adage: form follows
> > function.  What is *mostly* wrong with the GNUstep site is that the
> > content isn't goal-oriented.  Since it has no function, it doesn't much
> > matter what form it takes.
> Or better, it has more than one function!

That is not necessarily better.  Decision paralysis is not a desirable 
result.  More to the point: *list* those intended functions so that we 
can analyze how well the current site addresses them and/or how well 
proposed changes might improve the message.

> Accusing the looks of either GS or its webiste (looks as in 
> "appearance") is just too easy. And is the voice of one of the many GS 
> users.

Being dismissive is too easy as well.  The fact remains that the current 
site makes GNUstep unapproachable.  The failure of the Kickstarter 
campaign may be due in part to that.  I say you need to take a step back 
and reevaluate the message(s) you're trying to send, and take extra care 
to be sure that it's something that people (be it one or one thousand) 
actually want to hear.

> Most 
> often when people moan about the website, I'll point that the content it 
> there, but it is not well organized. Actually, most often information is 
> 2 clicks away.

That's 2 clicks too many.  Again, my point/question is *why* are things 
done in a way that is unhelpful?  And what further message does that 
send regards the GNUstep project as a whole?  The Halo Effect isn't all 
good.

> But gnustep has many goals. Mostly it attracts to two major kind of 
> users and again to two major kinds of developers! And users and 
> developers have different interests and needs.
> I started splitting things up, but then stopped due to lack of time

So when people express an interest in changing things, why are you 
dismissive of their viewpoint?  Wouldn't it make more sense to recruit 
them into the effort?  For goodness sake, implement your damn -delegate 
method!  :-)

And let me encourage you to also change your "many goals" thinking.  You 
would be better served by examining all the goals you (think you) have 
and figuring out what one umbrella they could all be put under.  You 
scale up, giving you all sorts of advantages.  Your main message should 
be unified, not split 4 ways.

> I am astonished that I often do read on other mailing lists (e.g. 
> netbsd, openbsd, windowmaker) of people wanting again old-style plain 
> look.

I'm not astonished at all.  If you look at current design trends, things 
are moving back to a "flat" UI.  I never was a big fan of fake 3D and 
putting pseudo-glare on everything.  More practically, a clean interface 
allow GNUstep to play to its core strengths rather than try to chase 
Apple when it comes flash.

> Pleasing them all is not easy, most often we scare them all away.

It is a mistake to think you need to please everyone.  What you *first* 
need to do is pick *someone* to please, and then do a bang-up job on 
that before moving on to something else.  As I have often stated, I 
think the main hurdle is getting started with GNUstep.  It's someone 
nobody deeply involved in the project sees, apparently, because you're 
all so far removed from the beginner's experience that it doesn't occur 
to you.

-- 
iPhone apps that matter:    http://appstore.subsume.com/
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, localhost, googlegroups.com, theremailer.net,
    and probably your server, too.