incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <>
Subject Re: [WWW] Feedback/"contact us" about the website link needed...
Date Fri, 10 Feb 2012 21:09:15 GMT
On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Marcus (OOo) <> wrote:
> Am 02/10/2012 07:46 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
>> On Fri, Feb 10, 2012 at 12:43 PM, Kay Schenk<>  wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Rob Weir<>  wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Kay Schenk<>  wrote:
>>>>> I'm just noticing that we do not seem to have a "Contact Us about this
>>>>> website" link on either
>>>>> --or--
>>>>> A somewhat minor thing I know given our focus at the moment, but...any
>>>>> thoughts?
>>>>> Header area? Footer area? Side bar?
>>>>> I think a prominent "Contact Us" (some place) would serve us well in
>>>>> customer satisfaction.
>>>> I'd be very careful here.   We don't have the resources for users to
>>>> actually contact us, except in very limited circumstances.  Remember,
>>>> we have 100 million users.  When users visit the website they are
>>>> typically looking for something, whether a download, or support info,
>>>> or something specific.  We're not the kind of website that people
>>>> visit just for fun.   So if we put a single contact address in a
>>>> prominent location, then lazy users will just shoot off emails to that
>>>> address.  We don't be able to handle that load.  And if that address
>>>> is a list address, we'll be deluged with private information going to
>>>> that list.
>>>> A good example of this problem is the bugzilla admin address that
>>>> shows up on our BZ page.  Even though it clearly says that is for only
>>>> reporting admin issues, we get many support questions to that address.
>>>> Ditto for the list owner addresses.  Any email address you put in
>>>> front of a user will be used as a life saver and grasped in their
>>>> moment of need.
>>>> That said, we should make sure we have coverage of the main reasons
>>>> people visit the website and have a reasonable way for them to get
>>>> what they need.  I think the main page is fine for people looking for
>>>> how to download and get support on OpenOffice.  It also has a good
>>>> link for people who want to learn more about the project.  The podling
>>>> website has specific pages for people who want to use the trademarks,
>>>> report a security vulnerability and other topics.  It also has a page
>>>> listing all of our mailing lists.
>>>> Another way to think of it:  99.99% of the time, if a user actually
>>>> needs to contact us, then the website has failed its purpose.  We can
>>>> only handle 100 million users if, for the vast majority of cases, they
>>>> can self-support themselves via the website's navigation and find what
>>>> they want.  So the challenge here is to handle the exceptional 0.01%
>>>> of cases, without becoming the path of least resistance for the other
>>>> 99.99%.
>>>> -Rob
>>> Rob--
>>> I understand what you're saying, believe me. I guess I feel we should
>>> provide an easier avenue for people to report problems with the site
>>> itself. I'm also aware that if I just put in a simple link with a
>>> "mailto"
>>> tag, many folks won't be able to deal with that because they won't have a
>>> "default" e-mail client.
>>> How about a "Contact Us" link that directs them to our existing "Mailing
>>> List" page --
>>> We could add a bit more description to the "Development Mailing List" to
>>> indicate that it would be used for submitting questions/problems about
>>> the
>>> web site.
>> If the issue is to give a way for people to report site issues the I'd
>> have text that is focused on that, like "report site problems" or
>> something similar.  A "contact us" link is more likely to be misused
>> for other types of questions.
>> The BZ "www" product can be used to report issues on the website,
>> mailing lists and Bugzilla itself.  So it might be best to point them
>> to that for reporting website issues.
> Do you really want to "solve" user problems like "I cannot download AOO. Can
> you help me?" over and over again via a bug tracker? I wouldn't. ;-)
> IMHO forget BZ to handle these kind of issues users can report. Better to
> create a FAQ or point to the User's Forums (then to point to already
> existing threads).
> FYI:
> We have already an example that I've implemented previously for reporting
> broken download links and that was migrated with the website move:
> (jump to the bottom to the last section above the footer)

That page says: "Please report any broken link or things you think
that needs to be corrected on this webpage by sending a mail to:"

I don't think that is what we want.

There is a difference between correcting content or suggesting a
different working on a webpage, and some one trying to download, but
failing.  Errors on webpages, just like errors in the product's code,
should go to BZ.   This is different than user support questions.
There may be cases where the user is not sure which it is.  But there
are many more cases where the user knows it is an error on the page.
Best to just have them report it in BZ.

> Interestingly, it seems to work to name the text like "... please use only
> for broken links and for nothing else ..." as they point already to the
> "ooo-dev@" mailing list. So, I think we haven't seen any mails like this,
> right?
> So, maybe not the worst idea to point to a mailing list. ;-) But I'm also
> fine to point to the (then a bit updated)
> "".
> My 2 ct.
> Marcus
>> Another approach would be to expand the homepage to have an "I have a
>> question" button, in addition to the "I want to learn more", "I want
>> to download", etc. buttons.  This could link to a page where give a
>> larger directory of topics and where to go for more information.
>> Support, press, trademarks, security, volunteers, donations, etc.
>> Maybe a list of 20 or more.  And then at the end, suggest ooo-dev for
>> questions on topics not listed above.
>> Or, maybe do this in the form of FAQ's?
>>> Or do you think it would be best to direct them to BZ?
>> IMHO, yes, for reporting site issues, including content issues on the
>> site.

View raw message