Eliot Miranda wrote:
So I suggest you augment the above with a significant effort to extend the existing web portals with visible and enticing links to content that explains community structure and process and extends a welcome hand to encourage them to participate. If the community doesn't effectively publish its process, no matter how open it may be in reality, it will be perceived as being closed and exclusive.
Yes, I am painfully aware of that.
I imagine verbiage to the effect of
"Squeak is a vibrant and expanding open-source community with many members. It has great ways to participate, in existying projects, in fixing bugs, in exploring blue-sky and in evolving the system both as a platform and as the future of computing. Here's (i.e. some link) a great overview of the community. Even if you're not ready to get involved now you probably will some time soon; this is a great place to be. So if not now, please remember this and visit the overview some time when you're interested in getting more involved."
would be suitably welcoming. But text to this effect needs to be front and centre, not hidden off side pages. Further, the overview needs to be well-written, well-structured, concise, informative and up-to-date. If we put effort into this I think there will be significant benefits, in rates and degrees of involvement, in reduction of conflict, and in enabling a more effective debate about evolving community structure and process. In short more happy lads and lasses and more Squeak.
Indeed. That is the big picture goal. Your points are all very well taken.
Cheers, - Andreas