next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects Hi Ashwin et. al.! On Sun, 8 Aug 1999, Ashwin Kutty wrote: > I have had to go through the IP process myself once before and I havent > had much difficulty in terms of training or getting the directory > structure setup etc. but I do see the problem that it takes quite a lot of > time as compared to say sympatico to get everything up and going.. This > again is probably due to the lack of obvious resources.. Does anyone know > how many employees sympatico hires for their call centers that can be > accessed 24 hours of the day 365 days of the year, its quite a lot and > getting Chebucto to compare to that would be almost imposssible. Indeed. > Here's a suggestion anyways:- > > 1) Make the IP training a helping hand, not a mandatory thing.. See below. > 2) Setup detailed FAQ with all the problems that all the current Editors > have faced at one point or another or some quirks specific to Chebucto.. This is a very interesting idea: maybe something along the lines of "everything you need to know to be a CCN IP Editor" with links to all the resources which are available. I've often argued that we have a lot of great documentation and help/support materials on the CCN but the organization and cross-referencing of these materials sometimes leaves something to be desired. Maybe the process would also point out places where our documentation is weak or missing. Id say, if you are interested, go for it. We could make such a FAQ (or whatever) accesible by linking it to appropriate places in the Help Desk the IP Support page and elsewhere. > 3) The above two to be mentioned in the agreements etc. > > This might take some work and a little bit of time, but with all the > information that already exists it wont take too much.. and I volunteer to > compile such an FAQ if need be, along with a little search engine if need > be.. As an extra feature a singular email address be setup seperate from > the regula help so as to reduce their work as well as make the questions > distinct for both the Ip stuff as well as general help.. What do you see as the function for a new list? We already have ml-admin, userhelp, ccn-ip, editors, ip-help, ccn-ipe, helpdoc, & ccn-tech. Maybe we can better harness one of the existing lists or make the group of them more visible. I wouldn't create another list unless there was a clear use for it. > its just a suggestion, in terms of easing the IP process.. In a nutshell the Current IP process (basically three steps) does three things: 1) Gathers info the CCN needs about the proposed site: a) contact name, address, phone, fax numbers b) names of majordomo lists, directory names c) description of what the IP is 2) Creates a contactual basis for the operation of the site on the CCN via the IP Agreement which sets out the terms of our agreement with the IP. This (in broad terms) sets out what we and they can and cannot do and hence gives us the authority to pull the plug if IPs misbehave. 3) Ensures (via IP Training) that IPs know what they are doing via a basic test & tutorial of HTML and of site-specific administrative knowledge (RCS, majordomo, on-line editing, FTP, etc.) This is to try and ensure that: a) sites should be at least minimally properly functional; and b) hence (through a standard way of presenting information to people) cuts down on commonly asked questions (and hence on demands of our tiny support capacity). I don't see how we could dispense with # 1 & 2 at all (although perhaps with some more thought and better design they could somehow be streamlined). With regard to # 3, training, it has historically been the position of the CCN that, as opposed to many commercials ISP's where IPs pay their money and the ISP doesn't care at all what they do in their site and whether it works correctly or not, that as a community organization we would take a little more responsibility for the technical standard of material running on our system and hence that we would provide some training which (should) ensure that things are at least minimally, properly functional. It could be debated whether we should do this at all, or how much training we should provide or whether it should be optional or not. One thing I've felt we might do would be to change the 'spin' which we put on our training and call it "IP Certification" (or something along this line) which might give it a little more cachet. Something along the lines of "become a CCN certified information provider editor" which would make it look more like an accreditation and less like compulsory training. Thus those people who chafe about having to take training might like the feel of it more. We could create a little 'CCN Seal of Approval' that could be awarded to people that could be displayed on their home page, etc. Comments? Cheers! Chris _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._. Christopher Majka <aa051@chebucto.ns.ca> Editor-in-Chief: Chebucto Community Net - Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada URL = http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/Home.html "Often his editorial policy was a nice compromise between blackmail and begging" - William Allen White, The Nation, Jun 18, 1938 _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._.
next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects