[Wikipedia-l] Re: An outsider's view on en-admin-only whatever and the rest

Fri Jan 27 00:00:07 UTC 2006

Kat Walsh wrote:
> On 1/26/06, sannse <sannse at tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>>
>>Alphax (Wikipedia email) wrote:
>>
>>>sannse wrote:
>>>
>>>>I think that something needs to be done to bring the two versions
>>>>together.  It seems clear that people are writing to helpdesk-l,
>>>>thinking that they are writing to the "site owner's" email address, and
>>>>asking questions that would be better answered officially.  And there
>>>>are plenty of mails on OTRS that could be better answered by a general
>>>>help desk.
>>>>
>>>>The only way I can see of bringing them together is on OTRS.  Perhaps
>>>>with two queues, one official mail and one helpdesk.
>>>>
>>>>I don't know, but I do think it's something we should look at.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Unfortunately there will always be people who use the wrong one.
>>
>>Yes, but with OTRS it is easy to switch email from one queue to another.
>>  If there were clear guidelines as to what goes in which queue, then it
>>wouldn't be a problem that some mail initially got in the wrong queue.
>>
>>Or we could have one big queue - with both addresses leading there (and
>>/many/ more helpers on it!)
> 
> 
> I like the idea of using the ticket system for both addresses: grant
> access liberally to the helpdesk queue (anyone interested and
> reasonably clued) while having a smaller crew of people to answer the
> mail that really must be handled carefully and discreetly
> (confidential concerns, potential media blowups, etc.), to be easily
> moved back and forth. I don't think helpdesk-l works as is, as it's
> difficult to keep track of messages, and the boilerplate responses are
> a *big* help answering mail in OTRS. (You can see these at
> <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/OTRS/en> - it's amazing how much of
> the mail we get is people applying to our university or wishing to
> email celebrities.)
> 
> The possible benefits of having the helpdesk as a list -- many
> experienced eyes all looking at one question, openness, easy signup,
> etc. -- are negated by the sheer volume of the list, dearth of regular
> volunteers, and the fact that many people are confused about the
> difference between sending to the private info address and to a public
> mailing list -- I don't think anyone anticipated the sheer volume of
> it when it was created.

I am totally with mindspillage here. Two queues and movement of emails 
between the two.

For those who do not know the system yet, our OTRS contains now possibly 
15-20 (?) queues and emails just circulate from one queue to the other, 
as needed. Some queues are just to answer information requests, others 
are more specialised (board, legal, donations etc....).

If I had one thing to ask for OTRS improvement, it would be for it to be 
able to better clean up spam though...

ant