Meta discussions vs. docs writing

[Gunnar Hjalmarsson]

Hi all,

I can't help noticing that - as usual - the meta discussion threads tend
to be rather long. Those threads include sometimes good examples of what
can be done to increase the general activity, but the common denominator
is that people post their ideas of what others can/should do.

Personally I'd like to see much more of: "Hey, I see that page a or page
a,b and c can be improved, and there is also a need for a page x and y.
I'm going to propose the changes/new pages which I would like to see."

A community like ours is dependent on contributors with sufficient drive
to take such initiatives. The lack of such contributors is our main problem.

My latest attempt to encourage contributors was this message:

https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-doc/2016-May/019899.html

The message pointed at some open bugs, and also included a general
appeal to focus on misleading contents. I received one (1) private
response, with some good specific ideas, but they weren't completed by
the string freeze at May 26th.

With that said, I don't claim that improved documentation and more
concrete guidance wouldn't help; it probably would. But again: At first
hand we need driving contributors, whose focus are to get things done,
and who ask if they encounter problems rather than focusing on the fact
that the documentation is not perfect (which it will never be).

Are there any such prospective driving contributors on this list? If you
are, please let us know.

As long as there aren't, I fear it will keep being hard to motivate
leaders/coordinators to step up.

-- 
Gunnar Hjalmarsson
https://launchpad.net/~gunnarhj