[ubuntu-art] ubuntu-art Digest, Vol 27, Issue 17

[Misosaki]

Hi,

Thanks for your quick response. My apologies -- I am actually a member 
of the list, but the email client's SMTP was set under another account 
with the same email provider and I didn't realise it until the 
auto-response arrived in another account.

First, to clarify: I am not accusing anyone of being rude/mean/etc., 
merely suggesting why some might perceive the process as being 
indifferent or "secret" to the community. The lack of a comprehensive 
source for information (again, an IRC and mailing list archive will not 
suffice for a public that wants to know at a glance what is happening) 
and roadmap (which indicates some level of organisation) made the 
situation seem worse that it may have been.

The top of the wiki page shows two images, along with the adjectives 
"unique and beautiful", along with a link to WallpaperRules. The palette 
is unofficial (kindly provided by a designer who sampled previously 
accepted designs), nor is WallpaperRules officially sanctioned. Because 
they were toted as unofficial (as opposed to pre-approved by the 
authorities), some designers took liberties with the palette, design 
elements, etc. because that was all the "guidelines" were -- merely 
starter ideas that don't have to be followed. In other words, 
documentation is considerably lacking, and the designs submitted reflect 
this confusion. There are also major differences between saying "the 
goal is to get back to something as (adjective) as x" and saying "the 
goal is to develop designs that reflect x, and since these colours form 
our theme palette, please keep designs to those colours only."  The 
latter is much more direct and helpful practically, because right off 
there are more definite starting points that -must- be followed (i.e. 
palette, message), rather than attempting to visualise "unique" or 
"beautiful" and expect designers to churn out work that will adhere to 
those terms (whatever they even mean for individual designers, let alone 
a non-designated audience).

As the forum thread also indicated, much of the concerns are centered 
around the default wallpaper rather than the package, so emphasising 
that the second candidate will be included in the package, as opposed to 
elaborating further on the rationale behind the first candidate being 
the default, makes some people think their questions are being 
misunderstood or intentionally ignored. If the final decisions are to be 
made by certain authorities, then it should be stated clearly in the 
wiki as part of the documentation on the entire planning/design process. 
Many in the community, who were under the impression that the community 
will take part in the decision-making, are now upset because they 
probably assumed otherwise, understandably from the Ubuntu reputation of 
community and sharing.

There was praise for the default wallpaper, of course, but what is more 
interesting is that there was considerably more praise for the second 
candidate. Even if the complaints are subjective, often there's also 
something to learn from them, and one should not be so quick to dismiss 
them. They are among the first signs that there is a problem, even if 
not everyone can express what that problem is exactly in useful 
feedback. If the final word rests with the authorities, I hope at least 
the authorities are informed of the feedback and the community is 
informed (that the authorities have been informed.) This is also where 
the Forum Ambassadors will be of much assistance, and I agree with 
Nothlit on this idea. 

In summary, much of this could be rectified for future releases if there 
were better docs, and more communication to the public (whether through 
the Ambassadors or "official" representatives). If the community is not 
to have the final word, please, at least let them know what is happening 
from time to time, and be prepared to present the final decision (to 
convince people that it's the best choice.) Not just "it's set to be x, 
but y will be included, so you can change it if you like"; not only in 
terms of why x is better than y, but what makes x stand out and what x 
has to offer. People want to know that a lot of thought has been put 
into that design, into that choice, so even if they may not like it, 
they will at least understand and respect it.


Regards,

Misosaki






Kenneth Wimer wrote:
> Normally you have to be a member of the list to post to the list. I allowed 
> this to go through so that nobody thinks I am secretly controlling things :p
>
> ...and now a few general comments which are not aimed directly at what you 
> have written nor should they be taken personally:
>
> The top of the wiki page explains exactly what was desired. Very few people 
> adhered to that. I have no problem with the other posts but you cannot tell 
> me that we are being rude or mean or secretive about anything when we state 
> exactly what we want and people submit stuff that is completely different. We 
> are making the community package so that even those which are completely 
> different can be included somehow - what more can one ask for in this 
> situation?
>
> There is a page with some decent guidelines to follow. There are pics posted 
> along with the statement "this is what we are looking for", there are colors 
> available which reflect the wishes of those in place to make a decision.
>
> The artwork was never a democratic process. It has been like that long before 
> I started and I have nothing to do with that. The decisions are made by those 
> above me in the company, one of them being the person who is paying for all 
> of this. In any case, this is a meritocracy, not 
> a "two-of-us-complained-on-the-forum-again-and-again-so-now-you-have-to-listen-to-us-ocracy"
>
> The statement that the picture was too dark was totally 100% correct, as was 
> the statement that it was too grainy. Hopefully we have fixed these problems. 
> If not we will keep working on them until they are fixed. Most of the rest of 
> the complaints on the forums are simply personal choice. Note that there are 
> lots of positive comments as well. For some reason people just like to take 
> notice of complaints more than a simple "I like it"
>
> I would love to see everyone who wants to improve things show up to the 
> upcoming meeting and work constructively on moving forward for Hardy. I will 
> be posting an agenda once the date is set (probably early tomorrow morning).
>
> --
> Ken
>
> On Monday 24 September 2007 21:37:13 higashiki wrote:
>   
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just a few suggestions on the three questions:
>>
>> 1. What is the problem today?
>> There is already a good community around artwork, but there are poor
>> efforts to coordinate human resources and a shortage of useful
>> documentation. Some people in the forums have already pointed out the
>> process isn't really a secret, but it seems so to others because there
>> isn't enough publicity and clear docs that explain how the planning, design
>> and selection process works. The community is frustrated in part because
>> they don't understand why certain a design is chosen (especially if the
>> design in question does not chime with their candidates). Some designers
>> are frustrated because there is not enough documentation in place that
>> spells out what is being asked of them. The result is a lot of wasted
>> effort in the "wrong" direction and not very good feelings about the
>> designers' roles in the overall process.
>>
>>
>> 2-3. How can we solve it? And execution?
>> - More cover material for the community that explains the entire design
>> process. Once a design is finalised, a statement that presents the design
>> to the rest of the community, answering the most oft-asked questions. E.g.:
>> What were the starting aims of the process, and what does the design say
>> about Ubuntu?
>>
>> - Better guidelines and/or kits for designers that includes some very
>> elementary but essential items, e.g. a palette (not just a sampling of
>> previously accepted colours), or theme components. At the moment there is
>> some disagreement over the colours that should be used, whether other
>> colours (if any) should be combined with the "palette".
>>
>> - Contrary to some views, audience and message does matter, because design
>> tends towards functional/communicative as it is towards artistic/creative.
>> All this work is going towards certain markets or viewers. Who are these
>> viewers, and what are they to get from the design? This should be one of
>> the starting points in the planning process -- establishing image and
>> audience. It might seem irrelevant to a "meta-debate", but it's part of how
>> the design process should be approached and, eventually, executed. It's
>> also one of the things that gives consistency in the visual experience,
>> because everything will be working towards a common goal or trying to say
>> the same thing to users. Consistency usually indicates that a good amount
>> of thought went behind the entire process, rather than something being
>> thrown together because the parts wee at hand.
>>
>> As for some execution details, the wiki and forum could probably do for
>> now. Artists looking for feedback specific to their designs can open up
>> separate wiki/forum pages and link to them on the Hardy page next to the
>> thumbnails, so that a comments section on the main page will contain
>> comments on the general process, while separate sections are available if
>> the public wishes to directly contact the artists (e.g. via the artists'
>> pages).
>>
>> In addition to "Forum Ambassadors", any important dates/deadlines should
>> also be posted to the wiki -- IRC and the mailing list are fine for the
>> design "team", but the rest of the community shouldn't have to root up
>> months of archives and transcripts trying to figure out what's happening.
>> Having a roadmap up for everyone to see adds to the impression of
>> transparency, that the "team" has got itself together and is making
>> progress. When someone asks, all the Ambassadors have to do is link people
>> up to the proper documentaton and field additional questions. It avoids
>> sending mixed messages and confusion.
>>
>> Overall, the resources are there, but better direction and more
>> communication are needed to mobilise them properly.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Misosaki
>>
>>     
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 2
>>> Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 13:25:11 +0200 (CEST)
>>> From: lasse at sosialisme.no
>>> Subject: [ubuntu-art] Let one thousand flowers bloom
>>> To: ubuntu-art at lists.ubuntu.com
>>> Message-ID: <33994.84.208.22.2.1190633111.squirrel at webmail.roedt.no>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>>>       
>
>   




Kenneth Wimer wrote:
> Normally you have to be a member of the list to post to the list. I allowed 
> this to go through so that nobody thinks I am secretly controlling things :p
>
> ...and now a few general comments which are not aimed directly at what you 
> have written nor should they be taken personally:
>
> The top of the wiki page explains exactly what was desired. Very few people 
> adhered to that. I have no problem with the other posts but you cannot tell 
> me that we are being rude or mean or secretive about anything when we state 
> exactly what we want and people submit stuff that is completely different. We 
> are making the community package so that even those which are completely 
> different can be included somehow - what more can one ask for in this 
> situation?
>
> There is a page with some decent guidelines to follow. There are pics posted 
> along with the statement "this is what we are looking for", there are colors 
> available which reflect the wishes of those in place to make a decision.
>
> The artwork was never a democratic process. It has been like that long before 
> I started and I have nothing to do with that. The decisions are made by those 
> above me in the company, one of them being the person who is paying for all 
> of this. In any case, this is a meritocracy, not 
> a "two-of-us-complained-on-the-forum-again-and-again-so-now-you-have-to-listen-to-us-ocracy"
>
> The statement that the picture was too dark was totally 100% correct, as was 
> the statement that it was too grainy. Hopefully we have fixed these problems. 
> If not we will keep working on them until they are fixed. Most of the rest of 
> the complaints on the forums are simply personal choice. Note that there are 
> lots of positive comments as well. For some reason people just like to take 
> notice of complaints more than a simple "I like it"
>
> I would love to see everyone who wants to improve things show up to the 
> upcoming meeting and work constructively on moving forward for Hardy. I will 
> be posting an agenda once the date is set (probably early tomorrow morning).
>
> --
> Ken
>
> On Monday 24 September 2007 21:37:13 higashiki wrote:
>   
>> Hi,
>>
>> Just a few suggestions on the three questions:
>>
>> 1. What is the problem today?
>> There is already a good community around artwork, but there are poor
>> efforts to coordinate human resources and a shortage of useful
>> documentation. Some people in the forums have already pointed out the
>> process isn't really a secret, but it seems so to others because there
>> isn't enough publicity and clear docs that explain how the planning, design
>> and selection process works. The community is frustrated in part because
>> they don't understand why certain a design is chosen (especially if the
>> design in question does not chime with their candidates). Some designers
>> are frustrated because there is not enough documentation in place that
>> spells out what is being asked of them. The result is a lot of wasted
>> effort in the "wrong" direction and not very good feelings about the
>> designers' roles in the overall process.
>>
>>
>> 2-3. How can we solve it? And execution?
>> - More cover material for the community that explains the entire design
>> process. Once a design is finalised, a statement that presents the design
>> to the rest of the community, answering the most oft-asked questions. E.g.:
>> What were the starting aims of the process, and what does the design say
>> about Ubuntu?
>>
>> - Better guidelines and/or kits for designers that includes some very
>> elementary but essential items, e.g. a palette (not just a sampling of
>> previously accepted colours), or theme components. At the moment there is
>> some disagreement over the colours that should be used, whether other
>> colours (if any) should be combined with the "palette".
>>
>> - Contrary to some views, audience and message does matter, because design
>> tends towards functional/communicative as it is towards artistic/creative.
>> All this work is going towards certain markets or viewers. Who are these
>> viewers, and what are they to get from the design? This should be one of
>> the starting points in the planning process -- establishing image and
>> audience. It might seem irrelevant to a "meta-debate", but it's part of how
>> the design process should be approached and, eventually, executed. It's
>> also one of the things that gives consistency in the visual experience,
>> because everything will be working towards a common goal or trying to say
>> the same thing to users. Consistency usually indicates that a good amount
>> of thought went behind the entire process, rather than something being
>> thrown together because the parts wee at hand.
>>
>> As for some execution details, the wiki and forum could probably do for
>> now. Artists looking for feedback specific to their designs can open up
>> separate wiki/forum pages and link to them on the Hardy page next to the
>> thumbnails, so that a comments section on the main page will contain
>> comments on the general process, while separate sections are available if
>> the public wishes to directly contact the artists (e.g. via the artists'
>> pages).
>>
>> In addition to "Forum Ambassadors", any important dates/deadlines should
>> also be posted to the wiki -- IRC and the mailing list are fine for the
>> design "team", but the rest of the community shouldn't have to root up
>> months of archives and transcripts trying to figure out what's happening.
>> Having a roadmap up for everyone to see adds to the impression of
>> transparency, that the "team" has got itself together and is making
>> progress. When someone asks, all the Ambassadors have to do is link people
>> up to the proper documentaton and field additional questions. It avoids
>> sending mixed messages and confusion.
>>
>> Overall, the resources are there, but better direction and more
>> communication are needed to mobilise them properly.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Misosaki
>>
>>     
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 2
>>> Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 13:25:11 +0200 (CEST)
>>> From: lasse at sosialisme.no
>>> Subject: [ubuntu-art] Let one thousand flowers bloom
>>> To: ubuntu-art at lists.ubuntu.com
>>> Message-ID: <33994.84.208.22.2.1190633111.squirrel at webmail.roedt.no>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>>>       
>
>