[ZWeb] erm assumptions
Wed, 13 Nov 2002 21:22:56 +0200
george donnelly wrote:
> I guess that's up to Zope Corp to decide but I was under the impression that
> Zope.org was mainly for the community and that this would be done under the
> auspices and for the beneift of and by the community; well, mainly anyway.
I agree. My point was about that when this kind of thing happens, it
has to be made clear who is charge and whose word this is.
> This is interesting but personally I see this as a more webloggish type
> project. that's just my personal preference. Perhaps your topics could be
> subject areas for the weblog?
Yep, could be. We are talking almost about the same thing - devil is
just in the details.
I view this in sense that blog weblog format is wrong. Meaning that
this newsletter would be like the place where people look into to find
the interesting parts available in other sources, blogs, mailinglists
etc. And not take the status away from these personal portals and blogs.
Concept and to some extent a fixed format, would bring continuity to
reporting and if the different slots are important issues that need
improving, make the difference to these issues.
As an example, if one slot is Zope products - and there people present
different products ( new and old ) and how they can be used - it would
help people to get the most out of good products, share possibly even
best practices and keep out of things that don't work anymore or are
considered even harmful. This kind of information is something that is
not available anywhere.
In my thoughts I see that this newsletter would create more audiences
for the important things and get people to see the good stuff in all
the great Zope portals and blogs. Problem being now that it requires a
lot of time to go through all the places, and it can even be
frustrating to go over and over again to zopezen and see that there is
This way there would still be a lot of interest for people to create
own Zope blogs and sites, since Zope news letter is not competing
against them -- rather than being a place where you want to be seen,
so that more people will follow links and come also to see your site
and your articles.
> If we get 20 people who can contribute a 30 minutes per week, then that 10
> hours per week of man-hours. not too bad.