next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects 1) This notion of changing the background texture is a issue/priority of no one but yourself. In the three years it has been in place I can't recall anyone prior to this recent discussion even complaining about it let alone wanting to change it. 2) If you want to initiate a process to re-examine it, go ahead. 3) In my earlier EMail to you I outlined why the original selection of a background texture was a somewhat involved process. For the benefit of others that you have roped into this discussion: > When the current background pattern was established we did extensive > 'beta-testing'. We probably tried a half dozen or more different patterns > and had a dozen or more people view the results on more than a couple > of dozen monitors of various kinds, monochrome vs. colour, different > screen resolutions, etc. > We rapidly discovered that the appearance of a background could be > *highly* variable from monitor to monitor. Some which looked great > on one system looked dreadful on another. No one pattern is perfect for > all. Many people collaborated and the process was a perfect illustration of why a team approach works. 4) If you want to re-visit the issue then, as I suggested, send your proposals to ccn-ip, ccn-tech & ccn-comm (and later ccn-ipe & all-ips) and see how people respond. So far I haven't heard anyone else who even feels that the background texture needs replacing, let alone is interested in adopting your approach. 5) On a technical level I pointed out that changing a background GIF would be a simple thing to do (replace one file) whereas your suggestion of using a browser-generated background would be a very complicated thing to implement (re-coding hundreds if not thousands of pages). Also a 3K file loads so quickly that loading-speed is not an issue. However, if you feel its worthwhile, make your case to the above people. See how they respond. Try and convince them. All power to you. [To make it perfectly clear: personally I have no particular interest in paper.gif one way or the other. If a concensus of people wanted a change and came up with a better alternative, great.] 6) On a policy/operations level, such changes which would affect the overall appearance of thousands of documents need be done in such a way as to consult with and listen to people affected. This is particularly the case in relation to the background texture, which is also used by some CCN Information Providers, so that changes to it will effect them as well What I do believe in and stand firm on is the team approach and consensus decision-making. Not arbitrary time lines; criteria of eligibility to participate, etc. What you fail to appreciate is that 'process' is a very important element of what a community network is all about. Giving people a chance to participate, listening to others, making your case in a group forum, modifying proposals to take into account the legitimate concerns of others, etc. not only tap into the collective experience and wisdom of others, they *build community* by educating and involving people in a process of collectively working with others. This process is how people learn such things. This process builds working relationships. This 'process' is every bit as important on the CCN as the 'product'. Regards, Christopher Majka _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._. Christopher Majka <aa051@chebucto.ns.ca> Editor-in-Chief: Chebucto Community Net - Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada URL = http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/Home.html "We have ... in this country ... far too many captive editors who cannot even be heard to rattle their chains." -- Carl E. Lindstrom _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._.
next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects