couchdb-marketing mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sebastian Rothbucher <sebastianrothbuc...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] WHY/HOW/WHAT
Date Wed, 16 Sep 2015 19:55:31 GMT
great - thanks!!

On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Johs Ensby <johs@b2w.com> wrote:

> +1 on using Twitter for this
> I can volunteer to make a proposal for the staging and follow-up by PMC --
> that needs to be in place for this not to go wrong also
> for AFS compliance, reports could be made on the mailing list.
>
> Johs
>
> > On 16. sep. 2015, at 14.42, ermouth <ermouth@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> what went wrong?
> >> how and where do we collect ideas about a slogan?
> >
> > ML is unsuitable – low engagement, no navigation, zillions of cluttering
> >>>>> in replies, inability to participate if you subscribed after topic
> was
> > issued and so on. Only flaming enthuziasts can use this tool, all others
> > just pass by. Apache better understand it, enforcing usage of this tool.
> >
> > And even for enthuziasts it‘s hard to track topics, splitted into several
> > threads. You can only do it only in inbox – all web UI are even more
> ugly.
> >
> >> Imo this should be a form where
> >
> > Form seems too much for slogan. Twitter is enough good, restricts length
> > and provides perfect engagement. If you ask on twi (and do it at least
> > three times taking in account timezones), I think you could receive a lot
> > of good new slogans.
> >
> > Since slogans all are short, it wouldn‘t be hard to create short list –
> > about 10-15-20 positions I think.
> >
> > For final poll there exist a lot of online instruments. Also voting
> should
> > hide poll results for person until he or she votes – it titillates
> person‘s
> > curiosity and motivates to make a click. Option ‘I do not want to vote,
> > want to see results’ is also good to ensure you‘ll have no random clicks
> > just to uncover current results.
> >
> >> what did we discuss if most of the proposals are voted with -1
> >
> > It only means that both options proposed for voting are weak.
> >
> > BR
> >
> > ermouth
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message