[Pydotorg-redesign] Simplify and prioritize (fwd)

-----Original Message-----
Stephan Deibel
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 4:13 PM
Subject: [Pydotorg-redesign] Simplify and prioritize (fwd)

[Stephan's top-posting remedied to relieve Aahz' apoplexy ;-]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 15:28:30 -0400
Subject: [marketing-python] Simplify and prioritize
I have gotten enough feedback for some recommendations.
python.org's primary purpose is to attract others to the language.
That is what everyone on this list is most concerned about.
Second, it is to be the launch pad for the community.
If we decide we cant accomplish both effectively on the homepage, then
I don't think making the community a subdomain or a
click-thru would upset
the community if they saw Python's popularity grow. It is
the job of the
marketing group to make those tough target-marketing decisions.
The message needs to be "why people use python."
Highlight veteran developers and journeymen, er...
journeypersons, and
their testimonials on the homepage. Just one at a time,
though. We either
rotate them monthly or randomly display from an archive.
(seconds in zope to
do either)
This list is already generating the direction some of the
quotes should go.
And, darn it, let's get some color, graphics, and photos on
the homepage.
If everyone wants to attract new users easier, then let's put
some makeup on
her and make her kissable. It needs to be more consumer
friendly. If you
want to attract business-types, then you have no choice but
to do this.
<marketing hype>And all images are watermarked with "PIL
Generated." :)
(it would be interesting if we became known as the
marketing-savvy Open
Source development group) :)
Highlight one or two top projects ONLY. And this needs to be rotated
regularly. Keep the makeup fresh and touchup often. But
dont throw too
much up at one time, or it will look gaudy and like you are
trying too hard.
Use BIG NAMES. Use well branded logos and images(that means
ones people
instantly recognize.) Tease with the top stories and people
will dig deeper
to find more until they are sold.
People in general want to be sold. If we dont close the
deal, then that is
our fault, and no one elses.

-------- End of Original Message --------

Personally I think a *minimum* amount of photographic-quality graphics
is an absolute requirement to make the web site "stand out" from the
crowd. Aahz might disagree, but as long as the content makes equal sense
in lynx/links I don't see any objection to quite a lot of color and just
a little photography.

Interestingly the Blender web site looks, from the layout, like it's
built in PHP-nuke or something very similar. Such frameworks do make it
remarkably easy to manage content. Is creosote so heavily loaded we
couldn't consider generating pages per-view?

OK, I've got DSL and it loaded fast but the point is that
adding a few
small images here and there (maybe less than in the above)
can make things
look a lot nicer.

Absolutely. And Trevor's main point, which is that we need to take a
more conventional marketing approach, is well made. It's all right
saying "if they web site has to be flashy to make them download Python
then let them stay away", but this is cutting our noses off to spite our
faces.

Most readers of this list would stand to benefit, directly or
indirectly, from an increase in Python's popularity, and we've been
talking about this since before PyCon with precious little to show for
it but a few mockups, and Andrew's/Fred's excellent restructuring work
on the content.

We have some terrific skills at our disposal. The present site shows how
sadly they are being underutilized. I think it's time to ask for a BDFL
pronouncement on how the webmasters make decisions and who's in charge
of the site!

I've been off this list for a while so hopefully I'm not revisiting
something that's been covered.
- Stephan

You might be, but it could stand to be said again. There's a LOT that
could be done to improve the present design even in the framework of the
existing content-generation methods.

I'm also hoping that we can provide the webmasters with a few simple
scripts for tasks like "Add a job posting", "Put a news item in" and so
on, but that's another discussion.

regards
--
Steve Holden http://www.holdenweb.com/
Python Web Programming http://pydish.holdenweb.com/pwp/

Aahz

2003-08-09 01:15:51 UTC

[I'm going to be repeating much of what I said to Trevor in response to
his private message, but it's faster for me to rewrite that than to get
his permission.]

Post by Steve Holden
[Stephan's top-posting remedied to relieve Aahz' apoplexy ;-]

<grin>

Post by Stephan Deibel
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2003 15:28:30 -0400
Subject: [marketing-python] Simplify and prioritize
python.org's primary purpose is to attract others to the language.
That is what everyone on this list is most concerned about.

I'm not sure I agree with this, in the sense that python.org is intended
to grab people who've never heard of Python. I believe that python.org
is used *after* people have already heard about Python, in order to learn
more about Python and to justify using it. That's quite a different
marketing perspective.

Post by Stephan Deibel
And, darn it, let's get some color, graphics, and photos on the
homepage. If everyone wants to attract new users easier, then let's
put some makeup on her and make her kissable. It needs to be more
consumer friendly. If you want to attract business-types, then you
have no choice but to do this.

"Consumer friendly" does not directly correlate with graphics and photos.
Particularly if my belief is correct, people going to python.org will
place their emphasis on finding information. There's also the issue that
lots of web research shows that any slow-loading page drives people away.

Post by Stephan Deibel
This was posted on marketing-python. I thought it contained some
valid points. Aahz responding "Color, okay. Graphics and photos,
nyet" which is for the most part valid and also matches my own
viewpoint for the most part, but on the other hand a site like this
www.blender.org seems to do a good job with relatively few graphics +
color.

No, a *little* color, otherwise you lose a sense of design coherence.
It's also critical that text be dark on a light background for
readability (with perhaps a few headlines of light text on dark
background for emphasis). I'm not adamantly opposed to visual imagery,
but any page had better load in less than thirty seconds on a 33.6 modem.

Post by Steve Holden
Interestingly the Blender web site looks, from the layout, like it's
built in PHP-nuke or something very similar. Such frameworks do make it
remarkably easy to manage content. Is creosote so heavily loaded we
couldn't consider generating pages per-view?

That's not the issue. The issue is creating the setup.

Post by Steve Holden
Absolutely. And Trevor's main point, which is that we need to take a
more conventional marketing approach, is well made. It's all right
saying "if they web site has to be flashy to make them download Python
then let them stay away", but this is cutting our noses off to spite
our faces.

But making a flashy web site *will* drive some people away. That's very
different from saying that we need an attractive web site. I also don't
agree that a "conventional" marketing approach is necessarily what will
work best for us. There are many ways of getting attention that
conventional marketing doesn't cover. The way I see it, the purpose of
the web site is to *support* our other marketing efforts.

Post by Steve Holden
We have some terrific skills at our disposal. The present site shows how
sadly they are being underutilized. I think it's time to ask for a BDFL
pronouncement on how the webmasters make decisions and who's in charge
of the site!

That seems reasonable to me. But the big question from my POV is how the
web site gets maintained, and until some people step forward to show
their commitment, the people currently doing the work to maintain the web
site should get a collective veto over any changes. Currently, IIRC (and
with a little memory help by skimming the pydotorg archives), the people
doing most of the website work are:

* Aahz
* Skip Montanaro
* AMK
* Fred Drake
* Steve Holden
* Mats Wichmann

with

* Barry Warsaw
* Greg Ward
* Thomas Wouters

doing most of the sysadmin work.

Post by Steve Holden
You might be, but it could stand to be said again. There's a LOT that
could be done to improve the present design even in the framework of the
existing content-generation methods.

Yup.

Post by Steve Holden
I'm also hoping that we can provide the webmasters with a few simple
scripts for tasks like "Add a job posting", "Put a news item in" and so
on, but that's another discussion.

That would be delightful, and I certainly don't consider it another
discussion -- that's at the root of much of my opposition to some of the
ideas that have come up. I don't have the experience or the mental
bandwidth to make such improvements, but I'm not willing to let the
currently minimal level of website maintenance get uprooted unless it's
for something demonstrably better for keeping the website updated.

--
Aahz (***@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/

This is Python. We don't care much about theory, except where it intersects
with useful practice. --Aahz

Steve Holden

2003-08-09 15:33:36 UTC

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 8:16 PM
To: Steve Holden
Subject: Re: [Pydotorg-redesign] Simplify and prioritize (fwd)
[I'm going to be repeating much of what I said to Trevor in
response to
his private message, but it's faster for me to rewrite that
than to get
his permission.]

Post by Steve Holden
[Stephan's top-posting remedied to relieve Aahz' apoplexy ;-]

<grin>

I'm not sure I agree with this, in the sense that python.org
is intended
to grab people who've never heard of Python. I believe that
python.org
is used *after* people have already heard about Python, in
order to learn
more about Python and to justify using it. That's quite a different
marketing perspective.

Possibly so, but I don't see a more relevant vehicle than www.python.org
for the purpose. Are you suggesting that other existing channels do the
job?

Post by Stephan Deibel
And, darn it, let's get some color, graphics, and photos on the
homepage. If everyone wants to attract new users easier,

then let's

Post by Stephan Deibel
put some makeup on her and make her kissable. It needs to be more
consumer friendly. If you want to attract

business-types, then you

Post by Stephan Deibel
have no choice but to do this.

"Consumer friendly" does not directly correlate with graphics
and photos.
Particularly if my belief is correct, people going to python.org will
place their emphasis on finding information. There's also
the issue that
lots of web research shows that any slow-loading page drives
people away.

Sorry, you are just plain wrong here. A *modest* amount of graphical
content makes even technical material more likely to be read. I'd be
perfectly happy to accept an overhead of (say) 20k per page just to see
some visual interest in the pages.

graphics +

Post by Stephan Deibel
color.

Personally I think a *minimum* amount of

photographic-quality graphics

Post by Steve Holden
is an absolute requirement to make the web site "stand out" from the
crowd. Aahz might disagree, but as long as the content

makes equal sense

Post by Steve Holden
in lynx/links I don't see any objection to quite a lot of

color and just

Post by Steve Holden
a little photography.

No, a *little* color, otherwise you lose a sense of design coherence.
It's also critical that text be dark on a light background for
readability (with perhaps a few headlines of light text on dark
background for emphasis). I'm not adamantly opposed to
visual imagery,
but any page had better load in less than thirty seconds on a
33.6 modem.

So turn this into content ... 33.6 kbit/s = practically maybe 2 kbyte/s
allowing for some communications lag. So you appear to think 60k is an
upper limit on content?

Post by Steve Holden
Interestingly the Blender web site looks, from the layout, like it's
built in PHP-nuke or something very similar. Such

frameworks do make it

Post by Steve Holden
remarkably easy to manage content. Is creosote so heavily loaded we
couldn't consider generating pages per-view?

That's not the issue. The issue is creating the setup.

OK.

download Python

Post by Steve Holden
then let them stay away", but this is cutting our noses off to spite
our faces.

But making a flashy web site *will* drive some people away.
That's very
different from saying that we need an attractive web site. I
also don't
agree that a "conventional" marketing approach is necessarily
what will
work best for us. There are many ways of getting attention that
conventional marketing doesn't cover. The way I see it, the
purpose of
the web site is to *support* our other marketing efforts.

So maybe flashy was a bad choice of word: how about "professional"? All
I'm saying is that I'd prefer something that looks like it was designed,
not just thrown together by a bunch of techies.

Post by Steve Holden
We have some terrific skills at our disposal. The present

site shows how

Post by Steve Holden
sadly they are being underutilized. I think it's time to

ask for a BDFL

Post by Steve Holden
pronouncement on how the webmasters make decisions and

who's in charge

Post by Steve Holden
of the site!

That seems reasonable to me. But the big question from my
POV is how the
web site gets maintained, and until some people step forward to show
their commitment, the people currently doing the work to
maintain the web
site should get a collective veto over any changes.
Currently, IIRC (and
with a little memory help by skimming the pydotorg archives),
the people
* Aahz
* Skip Montanaro
* AMK
* Fred Drake
* Steve Holden
* Mats Wichmann
with
* Barry Warsaw
* Greg Ward
* Thomas Wouters
doing most of the sysadmin work.

Yup. And most of my contributions recently have just been handling
low-level email and getting involved in this discussion.

Post by Steve Holden
You might be, but it could stand to be said again. There's

a LOT that

Post by Steve Holden
could be done to improve the present design even in the

framework of the

Post by Steve Holden
existing content-generation methods.

Yup.

Post by Steve Holden
I'm also hoping that we can provide the webmasters with a few simple
scripts for tasks like "Add a job posting", "Put a news

item in" and so

Post by Steve Holden
on, but that's another discussion.

That would be delightful, and I certainly don't consider it another
discussion -- that's at the root of much of my opposition to
some of the
ideas that have come up. I don't have the experience or the mental
bandwidth to make such improvements, but I'm not willing to let the
currently minimal level of website maintenance get uprooted
unless it's
for something demonstrably better for keeping the website updated.

Well, we can probably all agree that we don't want to increase our
webmaster workload. By the same token, I don't want to limit the content
to what we can produce using our existing methods. I think the idea of
mapping a portion of the site to a separate Zope/Plone server maintained
by "the marketing crew" (whoever they turn out to be) might be the best
solution. If they evolve certain ideas that can be reflected in the
overall site (such as changes in look which can be reflected in the
template) or if they can take over more of the existing site's content
over time then that would be to everyone's advantage.

Let's not turn away volunteers just because they're less comfortable
with the command line than we are!

regards
--
Steve Holden http://www.holdenweb.com/
Python Web Programming http://pydish.holdenweb.com/pwp/

Aahz

2003-08-09 17:43:27 UTC

Post by Aahz

Post by Stephan Deibel
python.org's primary purpose is to attract others to the language.
That is what everyone on this list is most concerned about.

I'm not sure I agree with this, in the sense that python.org is
intended to grab people who've never heard of Python. I believe that
python.org is used *after* people have already heard about Python,
in order to learn more about Python and to justify using it. That's
quite a different marketing perspective.

Possibly so, but I don't see a more relevant vehicle than
www.python.org for the purpose. Are you suggesting that other existing
channels do the job?

Your question doesn't make sense; I don't think there's anything we can
do on the web site to drag people in who haven't already heard about
Python from somewhere else. It's irrelevant whether other channels are
"doing the job" -- if we want people to come to the web site, we have to
*make* them do the job.

Post by Aahz
"Consumer friendly" does not directly correlate with graphics and
photos. Particularly if my belief is correct, people going to
python.org will place their emphasis on finding information. There's
also the issue that lots of web research shows that any slow-loading
page drives people away.

When people say "graphics and photos", I rarely find the result adds up
to 20K. That level is perfectly fine with me, but it's also confusing
from my POV to label that "graphics and photos".

Post by Steve Holden
So turn this into content ... 33.6 kbit/s = practically maybe 2 kbyte/s
allowing for some communications lag. So you appear to think 60k is an
upper limit on content?

That's about right for any page that isn't intentionally clicked through
as a "large" page (such as a FAQ). And that's total: HTML page, style
sheets, and graphics. I'd personally want the front page even smaller,
but I'm not going to argue about it.

Post by Steve Holden
So maybe flashy was a bad choice of word: how about "professional"? All
I'm saying is that I'd prefer something that looks like it was designed,
not just thrown together by a bunch of techies.

Works for me.

Post by Steve Holden
Well, we can probably all agree that we don't want to increase our
webmaster workload. By the same token, I don't want to limit the
content to what we can produce using our existing methods. I think
the idea of mapping a portion of the site to a separate Zope/Plone
server maintained by "the marketing crew" (whoever they turn out to
be) might be the best solution. If they evolve certain ideas that can
be reflected in the overall site (such as changes in look which can
be reflected in the template) or if they can take over more of the
existing site's content over time then that would be to everyone's
advantage.
Let's not turn away volunteers just because they're less comfortable
with the command line than we are!

Again, works for me.

--
Aahz (***@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/

This is Python. We don't care much about theory, except where it intersects
with useful practice. --Aahz

Roy Smith

2003-08-09 18:14:39 UTC

Post by Steve Holden
So turn this into content ... 33.6 kbit/s = practically maybe 2
kbyte/s
allowing for some communications lag. So you appear to think 60k is an
upper limit on content?

Is 33.6k dialup really a valid yardstick to measure by? I know POTS
modem is still what 90% of the general population uses, but we're
aiming at a technical audience, not the general population. My guess
is most of our audience has DSL or Cable at home and/or T1 or better in
the office. In any case, I'd certainly use 56k as the number for dial
bandwidth (line noise knocks you down a bit, compression buys you a bit
more, figure the two are a wash overall).

I'm certainly not a fan of bloated web pages that take forever to load,
but at least we should be realistic about what bandwidth we've got
available.

Aahz

2003-08-09 18:28:25 UTC