[Foundation-l] Communications issues

Thu Jan 4 09:43:27 UTC 2007

2007/1/3, Michael Snow <wikipedia at earthlink.net>:

> > I'm sorry, 'cause of language differences maybe I've not understood:
> > are you saying that "lack of resources" is one of the reasons why are
> > we collecting money?
>
> Yes.
>
> > This means, "people needs to be payed"? (I'm asking, 'cause I'm not
> > sure, that's not an accusation)
>
> See "human and technical" above. There's a need for servers, and there's
> a need to hire staff to do the things that volunteers can't, won't, or
> aren't trained to do.

Oh My God.
Question: who is *not* going to be payed?
Only editors? (The ones that made wiki so big)

>
> > In the recent past, I remember a user answering to me and other
> > italians "Communities doesn't matter. Funding does. Capisce?".
> > How does this phrase should be interpreted?
> > Let's think about a new user who's starting to communicate with the
> > Foundation, and he's been answered in this way.
> > Obviously, I don't think this is an isolated case.
>
> I don't know who said it or how it was intended to be interpreted. At
> face value, it's certainly not an appropriate expression of the
> Foundation's position. However, I'm surprised that you would take a
> random comment like this, that sounds like it was made on IRC, as an
> authoritative statement. A "new user" who wants to "communicate with the
> Foundation" is looking in entirely the wrong place there, and I'm not
> sure how a truly new user would receive such an answer (as opposed to
> someone used to getting information passed by word of mouth in a chat
> room). As I mentioned with regard to OTRS, good customer service skills
> are expected, and we do work with new volunteers so they understand not
> to give such inappropriate responses.

I'll respond to this in another mail, cause it's a little more
complicated than how you draw it.

> ...if
> you've been subscribed to this list, and truly have no memory of reading
> communications about the Foundation's issues, I really can't help you
> with that.

Maybe you can't help me, but you should be worried about it.
"Receiving" is one of the most important element of the communication.
It *is* the most important element.
A communication which's not received, is a communication which has
failed. If theres' no receveing, there's no communication. There's one
of the first things learned by a communicator.
What you should do is wondering "Why has he not memories of CommComm
comunication at all?"

> Ideas are cheap compared to action.

Oh, ok. I'm cheap.

Speaking seriously: it's funny.
I made a long intervention explaining why perception is important in
communication (and that's why we should not have had advertising on
wiki), but noone seemed to have read it.
Communication, withous receveing.