Fwd: Does Ubuntu Care About It's Documentation?

[Tommy Trussell]

On 3/14/06, Andreas Lloyd <lloydinho at gmail.com> wrote:
> I suppose that this was Robert's original point: that the system
> itself needs to be better at helping the user. If the system presents
> the help directly to the user at start-up and proves worthwhile and
> plentiful - there'll be less need to look at website.

This is a good point, but I, too, am disappointed in how the article
(in the blog) presents the situation. Not just the
typographical/grammatical error in the title, but the logic of it.

So here's what _I_ would hope for from such a blog posting: First, a
clear statement of where things are now and how the author was
involved in making things the way they are (establishing credibility).
This can be followed by a statement of the *opinion* of the author
regarding a change the author feels is important. Then a suggestion of
the best way for this to happen, ideally including the mechanism the
author is currently using to try to make that work. (Oh, maybe this is
starting to sound like a bug report!)

If the author feels spurned by personalities in the documentation
team, then that's a different issue that should be dealt with
separately. I would bet that almost all of the folks on the team care
deeply about the documentation, or they wouldn't be participating.
(And I am sure many, many others like me also care about the
documentation but current work/life circumstances have kept us from
participating much to this point.) Surely the author of the posting
realizes how insulting the premise is -- it's bound to be
inflammatory. This is "trolling," but most often trolls are
semi-anonymous. Because people in the community know the writer from
past work makes it hurt even more.

But people who care about the process can always do better, and work
together to make it better than they can do on their own.

So show people the ropes, show them how to pull the ropes, and
everyone can pull the ropes together.