On 11/2/13 3:48 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
Le Fri, 1 Nov 2013 22:59:33 +0000,
e-letter <inpost@gmail.com> a écrit :
On 01/11/2013, Charles-H. Schulz
<charles.schulz@documentfoundation.org> wrote:
But when we come to think of it, these people started somewhere,
one day, to contribute, and while they all have their own
reasons, we (the people in charge of "marketing") thought that
everybody has the ability to contribute. The question is: how
can we make it 1)interesting 2) accessible 3)easy to understand
what the various tasks are 4)possible to spread the word about it?
Question 2 requires a definition of "contribute", e.g. is a bug
submission contribution? Is helping another user via the mailing
list a contribution?
Users support, yes.
Q5 answers above, therefore should appear in the survey before q2!
Q11 what is the relevance of knowing users' locations?
Agree with Mr Springer's message.
LO people should simply read the mailing list; every random date,
select a random number of mailing lists threads, read, analyse and
consider whether further action is necessary. You will get much
better information than a biased "survey"
I read Mr Springer's message and we do not want to have a biased
survey at all. One of the reasons we came up with a survey is that
we were precisely not able to get the big picture by reading
mailing lists. It's important to note that there is no good or bad
answer in this survey, it's about understanding opportunities we
could create for users.
Most if not all of these surveys that tend to be biased in some way,
and all of multiple choice surveys in general, have the same
problem. Not enough options for the user. IMO, the survey could
simply be modified, and then the construction of the questions as
well as the actual questions aren't so important.
1. Always have a "None of the above" selection
2. Allow the selection of more than one option, or no option
at all. 3. Always have a comments window for each page so you can
explain your choice(s). Multiple choice only limits the feedback you
get. 4. At the end of survey, have a general comments section where
the user can express just about anything regarding LO.
Surveys constructed without the above features will almost always be
biased in some way.
A scenario: 100 people check out the survey. 40 of them are like
me, they can't give you accurate answers. They exit, and you just
lost 40% of potentially useable information.
All surveys are meant to tell the originator(s) information they want
to know. But the information you want may not be what you *need* to
know to be successful.
I could go on about why I'm looking for LO alternatives, but that's
not the topic of this thread. If you are interested and have the
time, I'd discuss LO off list. The email address in the header is
valid.
Last but not least the geography might count, yes. You do not see
your contribution potential whether you're in a country that has
ubiquitous broadband or in a country where most people connect to
the internet via phones or for the wealthiest, satellite.
The geography info also tells you where your users are, also. That
can be helpful to identify where you may need to find out why usage
in some locations is low. Low usage may not have anything to do with
LO at all.
As for satellite usage, wealthiest does not always apply if you
consider only cost alone, not speed. I've lived at my location for
9.5 years. Modem and true satellite (no "mixed" systems) were the
only options until 2-3 years ago when a main trunk line was replaced
with fiber optics. I had satellite for many years. For the same
price, DSL basically just gave me more speeds and unlimited data.
Not enough difference in price for the base packages to really be a
factor.
I do hope you have the time to contact me via email. (HTML
preferred) I'd like to see some serious competition for MS Office,
but there appears to be none, either open source or commercial.
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.