<div>2006/2/11, Tom Chance <<a href="mailto:tom@acrewoods.net" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">tom@acrewoods.net</a>>:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> To get people from the borders of the movement to jump in we need to provide a space where they feel comfortable working (so not mailing lists and SVN/CVS). We need to provide the tools and documentation so that they can quickly find useful jobs to do and find out how to do them well. </blockquote><div> You are right. What inspired me was Launchpad and especially Rosetta project. many of the subscribers will know that this is a project for very easy translating software. I managed to do it in 5 minutes. In GNOME Germany I found the situation that the only information of how to help translation was: Here is the IRC channel and here is the mailing list.  GNOME.org also is bad in contact information. Look at <a href="http://www.gnome.org/contact/" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.gnome.org/contact/</a> .  KDE.org is essentially better: <a href="http://www.kde.org/contact/" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://www.kde.org/contact/</a> but also not perfect, still. I understand that mailing lists have a traditional value, but i'd rather suggest that we prefer using ticket systems and present a few mail adresses - and that those might be answered by a bunch of people. That could even  be hundreds! They can filter and forward or tag the incoming messages. - But I do not want to get too much into the details of the websites. What does "contact mean"? I would guide users in a away that you know more and more about them. A flat structure is better, but from contact you must find out what a "visitor" wants: 1. he is a journalist want some specific information or a person to speak to (for an interview or a short telephone call) 2. He is a Windows or Mac user being interested in the free desktop. 3. He is already a GNOME user and wants to get updated what is new and what else he can do with GNOME. 4. He is a KDE or GNOME user and wants to switch to GNOME or KDE. ;-) 5. He is a Windows/Mac programmer being interested in programming with Gtk/Qt 6. He is somebody who wants to use KDE/GNOME in the organization or company he is working in. 7. He is a Linux/BSD programmer that wants some technical details. 8. He is a GNOME/KDE user and wants to report  a bug. 9. He is a GNOME/KDE user and wants some documentation or help. 10. He is an industrial leader that wants to invest in GNOME/KDE (I think of companies like Nokia) or to witch to a free software model. All this visitors need to be satisfied in one way or the other. Right now the homepages do look more like everybody is already a geek and he should better not use KDE/GNOME if he is not willing to become one. </div> </div>Honestly I do not understand the resistance that is there if one wants to change that attitude. Is it that we are used to swim in our community and know how each other "smells"? I think a task the free desktop have in their future is to emancipate more and more from the companies that earn their money fro  the desktops and als give back money. In the interest if the companies itself. The interestes of comapnies like Sun, Red Hat and Trolltech migth differ, but if free software and free desktops shall succeed, ti is necessary that the desktops can live their own interests. I see similearieties here to comapnies like Sony that do have entertainment divisions but also divisions for multimedia devices. Those companies will have a hard time because thwary each other. In this emancipation I see the cooperation of free desktops as an important step. if we take the licensing situation of Qt today one could easily adopt the principles of the GNOME Foundation to be to assist KDE: "to create a computing platform for use by the general public that is completely free software." (<a href="http://foundation.gnome.org/">http://foundation.gnome.org/</a>). the question should be: By what means? The goals never stated that Gtk should be prefered. The cultures of both desktops have developed differently, though. What are the essential questions for collaborative marketing? How do we reach our goals. What are our goals? I think we  often think we already know the answers to such simple questions, but I think there are many differences in both communities (not between, but also inside KDE and GNOME), what our goals should be. I think the question of Qt vs. Gtk is not important for the user. But many,many geeks think that it is INDEED important. I admit that those geeks are also users. I think there are parts of our culture that are brilliant, but some are not. I think the parts that are everything but brilliant should change. Thilo -- <a href="http://vinci.wordpress.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">http://vinci.wordpress.com</a>