[Marketing] Re: Marketing Digest, Vol 16, Issue 10

[daniele.ocu ocu]

Dear all,

I am veryveryvery sorry If I seemed too hasty in the words I chose in the
prior email. Of course that if any actual action in the website is taken, it
will be of common desire both of the Marketing committee, of the Webcom and
of other who are interested.

This is just the beginning, where *gathering information* is a crucial part.


Getting *your ideas* on what is good about the website and what might be
object to change is an extremely important part of planning what can be
done.

This is JUST AN EFFORT to get the OSGeo Community to *start discussing and
thinking* of ways to gather more users, contributers, volunteers and *
sponsors* to this vibrant community.

This is STILL Just a discussion, a place to set ideas.

Daniele.

On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 12:10 AM, Christopher Schmidt <
crschmidt at metacarta.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 03:43:32PM +0900, daniele.ocu ocu wrote:
> > Dear Marketing committee,
> >
> > We have started working on the website redesign.
>
> Daniele,
>
> I'm concerned that this is being done without interaction with WebCom --
> or if this interaction is happening, I'm not aware of it.
>
> Currently, I've expressed some concerns about the current state of the
> OSGeo website, but I do not feel that there is sufficient agreement in
> what the website should *be* that we can discuss Content Design, Layout
> Design, etc.
>
> I have some strong ideas about what the OSGeo website should be -- or at
> least, questions about what it should be that would need answering
> before any redesign was attempted.
>
> Additionally, I think that any website redesign effort can only be
> undertaken if a sufficiently motivated set of developers in the website
> technology are involved. I'm not convinced that that is currently the
> case; I don't know how much experience you have with the current website
> technology, but I didn't have the impression that you were comfortable
> implementing possible changes in this regard.
>
> At the moment, I would like to say that although Marketing can feel free
> to create an advisory suggestion to WebCom about suggestions for the
> website, I  do ont feel that WebCom has suficient resources to implement
> any possible suggestions, and I would consider the feedback from
> Marketing -- except insofar as it relates directly towards marketing
> tasks like management of branding -- to be advisory only.
>
> Please take this into account in any decisions/investment placed in this
> direction.
>
> SOmetime in the near future, I will do my best to outline my hopes for
> the OSGeo website to the members of the community; I expect the end
> result will be a discussion (either on mailing lists or in a more
> interactive forum) about what the OSGeo website should be. When I do
> this, I will involve Marketing in that discussion as much as possible.
>
> I appreciate the effort you want to go through, but I just feel at the
> moment that it might be a wasted effort due to lack of general agreement
> on the tasks needed for the website; if this is the result of some
> larger discussion I'm missing, I apologize, and I look forward to
> resolving my confusion. I don't want to stop the Marketing committee
> from participating in website advisory positions, but I also don't want
> to see anyone put forth effort  which may be wasted.
>
> Best Regards,
> --
> Christopher Schmidt
> MetaCarta
>



-- 
Researcher @ Osaka City University
Graduate School for Creative Cities
http://gisws.media.osaka-cu.ac.jp/gistrends
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/marketing/attachments/20090117/969c2b1b/attachment.html