mFAQ (was: openmoko articles)
ispinn at gmail.com
Fri Feb 16 17:57:15 CET 2007
> That would be really great. We just can't seem to scale enough to do it
> ourselves, so any help from you guys would be awesome!
Make THEM want to come to US...well, not *make* them, but provide the
easy way to amenably and quickly get the right info in their inbox.
Use the tools we've got to scale the effort in our favor as best we
The goal is to make it
1) -easy for us to broadcast corrections,
2) -easy for us to track misinformation thoroughly, and
3) -easy for news publishers, writers, and geeks to find corrections.
Create an openmoko misinformation FAQ (mFAQ).
Hmm...let's see...a wiki page on corrections errata--sort of like
newspapers do when they publish details incorrectly. Newspapers
follow-up with corrections. But we're not making the errors (rather,
we're finding them). We're not obligated to make the corrections
(rather, we truly desire the corrections to circulate), and better
yet, the mFAQ becomes a living document, forever providing news
publishers, writers, and geeks with the Facts(tm) (FAQs!).
We do it without malice or blame.
Since we're just now publicly starting up, starting a wiki mFAQ
compendium of *corrections* makes sense, can quickly reign in the
misinformation this early on, and state the correct information.
An idea for a suggested set of procedures might be:
1. An openmoko community member (OCM) notes the published error
2. OCM enters error info on the mFAQ wiki (keep it simple but complete)
a. Article title, or platform feature in error
3. If the OCM can follow-up with the author, notes can be made in
(d). If not, leave it blank and post a note in community asking for
follow-up help. (Question: can the openmoko site track open and closed
*misinformation articles*, sort of how bugs are tracked? It's just an
idea. If the site tool can accommodate tracking this, then the mFAQ
would only be updated with completed contacts and corrections, not
open items for follow-up.)
4. The OCM provides the author with the URL to the mFAQ for their
future reference, and suggests they freely circulate the mFAQ URL to
others as necessary. (This keeps the author informed, and propagates
the correct information out into the ethos. I'm not sure about putting
email addresses on the mFAQ. It would be nice to track the author's
name and email, but putting it on the wiki doesn't seem right. Thus my
idea of using a site tool to track the misinformation and contacts,
saving email addresses and names for follow-up in the site tool rather
than the wiki, since by keeping them in the site tool they're not as
publicly available as on the wiki.)
5. If the OCM can't follow-up, the entry remains open until another
community member puts the monkey on his or her back and contacts the
6. The OCM suggest that the author join the [announce] list. :-j
Friends call me the Voice of Reason.
Is there a Media Contact?
(/|\) Peace and harmony,
More information about the community