on having two squeakland websites

Hi everyone,

A few people have been suggesting that Squeakland should have two  
websites, the "official" site we have now, and a new "community"  
website with a different look & navigation scheme.

As with all suggestions, I'm open to ideas, but in this particular  
case, I'd like some serious community discussion about this.  I'd like  
there to be solid, compelling, reasons for such a move.

Here are the reasons I'm against "splitting the baby", as IMO would  
happen if we make two sites.  I'll distinguish as squeakland.org  
(official) and etoysville.com (community).


1. etoysville.com would siphon away a significant number of visitors  
from squeakland.org

The single biggest boost in squeakland.org website traffic will be the  
public showcase, because of its social networking potential.  When  
everyone can upload Etoys projects and easily email their friends and  
family and post on facebook and myspace about it, etc, our traffic  
numbers will grow exponentially from what we're experiencing now.    
IMO, it is to the benefit of Squeakland that these new visitors come  
to squeakland.org, where they can see "download", "contact", "about",  
"tutorials", "donate", etc.  They will be much more likely to click  
such links than they would if there was a single "squeakland" link  
from etoysville.com back to squeakland.org.


2. squeakland.org will be able to have callout boxes around the site  
with random public projects

It's very easy to have projects appear on the home page and perhaps  
even within a sidebar on all pages on the official website.   This  
will draw people to the showcase and keep the site looking fresh and  
alive, which is always a good thing.  The more people see fresh  
content, the more they will return to the website.  Yes, we could  
achieve the same thing with RSS between sites, but there's two  
problems here.  First, clicking the link draws visitors away from squeakland.org
, which decreases the chance they will click "donate", "come to  
squeakfest", or any of the other links we want them to see.  Second,  
clicking such a link and finding yourself at a different website with  
a different look & feel is confusing to new visitors.  Remember that  
our target audience is largely non-technical.  We could make it  
somewhat clear from the callout box, but my first point still applies.


3. "squeakland" as a name is already well suited to connote community

 From the start, I've always seen squeakland.org as a shared website  
for everyone, not just the sandbox for arbitrarily selected team  
members :)    Having hundreds of new voices scattered throughout the  
site is a very positive move.   It will generate a strong feeling of  
community for anyone that first visits the site (and we want first  
time visitors to show up where the "download" and "donate" links  
are.   Put another way, I want squeakland.org to resemble New York  
City more than Los Angeles .... the former has lots of people walking  
the streets, the latter has almost no pedestrians in evidence.   I  
*want* to see the people.


4. having *lots* of fresh, compelling content is good PR for  
squeakland foundation

As we try to raise money from corporations, government organizations,  
and individuals, it would hurt us to have the "10,000+ projects"  
number located on another website with a different look and apparent  
group.   If there's two sites to choose from, there will always be the  
"who should I give money to" confusion, or more likely, "I don't need  
to give money because it looks like they're volunteer community is  
much stronger than their official representation."  One of the most  
impressive things about the Scratch site is the "number of projects"  
box, which simply says "SUCCESS" to new visitors.    Their large  
number of projects, and the way it's integrated into their main site,  
is IMO a big reason for their success.  People see people using it,  
and so they say, "neat, I'll try it."


5. having the showcase allows us to integrate with other  
squeakland.org functionality

Everyone who creates a showcase account has an option to subscribe to  
our newsletter.  The more subscriptions to our newsletter, the better  
our ability to keep Etoys in people's minds and promote events like  
Squeakfest.   My plan was to have a weekly "best of" email that goes  
out to interested people that contains five or so new projects from  
the showcase.  This can already be done with the current website.    
Also, anyone who clicks through such emails will go to squeakland.org,  
not etoysville.org, which means we're driving traffic to the site we  
want action from, not a separate site.   Other functionality includes  
the ability to make multi-language descriptions for all projects, etc,  
etc.


6. having two sites will make ongoing maintenance more difficult or  
less likely to happen

People tend to improve what's right in front of them, so if the bulk  
of the time from our community is spent on a separate community site,  
then they'll spend less and less time on squeakland.org, hence they'll  
be less likely to volunteer to improve content, see typos, or  
whatever.   Also, there will be a natural "us vs them" vibe that gets  
started, where squeakland.org will be seen more as the "suits" site  
that's not really the real volunteer site.  (as with OLPC)


7. duplication of content is inevitable with two sites

Splitting efforts like this generally leads to duplication of effort,  
where, for example, someone down the road decides to add a community  
blog on etoysville.com and it ends up drawing attention (and life)  
from squeakland's blog, etc.   As much as we say "we won't compete, we  
won't duplicate", it's pretty much inevitable, particularly when the  
new site gets several orders of magnitude more traffic than the  
official one.


8. it's just confusing to have two sites

People will always end up on one site or the other, wondering where  
something on the other site is.   People won't know which site to go  
to, or where to put content, etc.     You can say, "this is the  
project server" as loud as you want, and there will always be people  
who get confused by two sites.


9. the new site will draw google rank away from squeakland.org

With google, who links to you is what determines how high up on the  
list you place.    Having LOTS of people linking to their projects on  
their blogs, facebook, etc, will help squeakland's google rank  
immeasurably.   You'll be able to type "educational software" in  
Google and actually show up in the first or second page.   Not so if  
we split the sites . . . the community one will always win.   Also,  
having two sites makes it confusing for other sites when determining  
which site to link to.   Schools will want to link to their group on  
the project server . . . requiring them to put both the squeakland  
website and the community site is cumbersome, and won't always happen


10. having one site helps us enforce a simple & clear navigation  
structure

One of my primary roles at my work is warning clients about making  
their site architecture & navigation too cluttered.   The general  
trend is always to add this page, and this section, and this other  
thing, all of which sounds like a good idea at the time, but people  
forget the big picture . . . the first time visitor.    I force them  
to keep things within the "rule of fives", where the top three levels  
of navigation must fit within logical groupings, so that there's only  
so many misclicks before people find stuff.   Usability is the "art of  
the obvious", and it's HARD to imagine how people use a site.  You  
need hallway reviews, and stats analysis, etc, etc.    With a separate  
community site, there's a greater danger that it'll turn into the OLPC  
wiki, where it's much too hard to find things of value.   Yes, you can  
say, "the community committee can enforce usability", but I'll just  
point you back to #6 above.  They can help squeakland.org too.


Anyway, these are my major points.  There's other ones like  
scalability, stats gathering, load balancing, ease of updates, single  
point of monitoring, etc, but these are really extensions of #6.  
Also, we already have a wiki, which is community generated, so we're  
really talking about THREE squeakland websites, not two.  (and yes, I  
know that #8 applies to having a wiki ... it's a concern of mine)


What reasons are there for having two sites?

I can see five possible reasons so far:


A) it will make the volunteer community feel more empowered to have  
their own garden to grow, leading to more effort by these volunteers.

My response to this is that we should make squeakland.org more  
appealing to volunteers, if it isn't already, primarily for the  
reasons above, particularly #6.


B) not invented here

Some of us want to design & write the software underlying the  
community site, or at least customize some other software, because  
it's fun and fulfilling, and would be good for local installations.

As with SuperSwiki2 and Michael Rueger's system, Squeakland encourages  
such efforts and will help promote their use in local installations.    
For the reasons listed above, I'd still prefer to have the centralized  
project server be integrated with the primary website.  Also, do the  
wants of a handful of developers really outweigh the needs of a much  
larger community?   I need a more compelling reason than "because I  
just want to".


C) squeakland is built on storymill, which is not "free and open  
source" or written in Squeak itself

My company, Immuexa, is not charging Squeakland for Storymill, and  
we've given quite a bit of free labor to add Squeakland specific  
enhancements, such as requests by the folks in Brasil for their  
Squeakfest site.   Immuexa has a team of paid developers that  
continually enhance Storymill as they work on other client  
projects . . . in other words, Storymill's continued improvement is  
paid for by corporate clients.    Storymill is production ready, using  
the same technology as used by such sites as Bank of America and  
Travelocity, etc.   We can make *need-based* changes to Storymill very  
quickly, and safely . . . either by me or any of my staff.    There's  
LOTS of functionality in Storymill that we're not yet using, it  
combines elements of many social networking, CMS, email & contact  
marketing sites ... lots of stuff.   If things were switched to Squeak  
and Seaside, me and my staff would no longer be able to help in this  
way.

That said, if the larger community really feels strongly that all  
things Squeakland should be free and open source, and written in  
Squeak, then I'd at least ask:

1. that the replacement(s) is immediately capable of replicating all  
of the functionality of the existing Squeakland website

2. that someone else spends the time needed to migrate all existing  
data to the new system (we'll give you database access & SSH, of course)

3. that you carefully consider that the vast majority of our users  
really don't care what's under the hood . . . it's a tool like  
Dreamweaver or JIRA.

4. that you consider that the effort needed for such a switch could be  
better spent on improving Etoys itself


And the last reason, which has not been publicly stated, but I suspect  
exists . . .

D) some people are frustrated with me personally and want the freedom  
to change things without me saying "well, what about so and so"

In the end, it usually comes down to personal feelings about creative  
control and interpersonal dynamics.  In the last nine months, I've had  
many people express appreciation for the way I'm doing things, but  
also a few who seem to bristle whenever I open my mouth.   My style of  
spoken delivery is strong, and people can often mistake passion for  
arrogance or the need to be right.   I'm fully aware of such things.    
Behind the passion and apparent obstinance, there's actually a great  
willingness to listen to other opinions and change my opinions  
completely, which if you listen long enough, you'll see happen often.  
I'm a proud flip-flopper.    I tend to see many, many factors all at  
once (as this email may show), and my ability to express them in  
person is not always up to the task, so people sometimes assume that  
I'm just being difficult and, even worse, not respecting their  
opinion.   I really do respect all opinions (even the anti-OLPC guy).  
My willingness to put other opinions to the test is really a sign of  
respect, not disrespect.   And of course, I can completely disagree  
and still respect your opinion.  Why people link the two is a mystery  
to me.

Since the most negative remarks seem to come from the people who have  
already given the most to Etoys, I tend to believe what someone told  
me a while back, that "we're all going through different kinds of  
separation anxiety", and that at least a part of the negativity comes  
from a "who is this guy, and why is he telling me what to do"  
feeling.  It hasn't been easy taking the reins from such a talented  
and selfless group.   And of course there's always "I just don't like  
him" too, which is inevitable in some cases.

My answer to all of this is simply:  let's talk about it.  I'd rather  
hear that you don't like me, then perceive it in your body language or  
tone of voice.  Such disagreements are usually helped by frank and  
honest conversation.  They usually stem from misunderstandings, which  
can only be helped by talking things out.  So Skype me and say, "You  
piss me off because . . ." and I'll be glad to hear it.

Anyway, this is a long email.  If you've read the whole thing, I'm  
impressed.  Thank you.

Let us know what you think about the two site plan.  I really am open  
to the idea, but want my ten points above countered before making such  
a drastic step.

Take care,
Tim
_______________________________________________
squeakland mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland

On 02.09.2009, at 16:45, Timothy Falconer wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> A few people have been suggesting that Squeakland should have two  
> websites, the "official" site we have now, and a new "community"  
> website with a different look & navigation scheme.

As we discussed before on etoys-dev, we are talking about separating  
the redacted content from the community contributed content. I  
suggested this can run on the same system, it would just be a  
different visual theme.

This would make it obvious to visitors if they are on the "official"  
or the "community" pages.

Maybe I shouldn't have said "community site" before and "community  
section" instead - but the surrounding discussion should have made the  
intent clear.

> As with all suggestions, I'm open to ideas, but in this particular  
> case, I'd like some serious community discussion about this.  I'd  
> like there to be solid, compelling, reasons for such a move.
>
> Here are the reasons I'm against "splitting the baby", as IMO would  
> happen if we make two sites.  I'll distinguish as squeakland.org  
> (official) and etoysville.com (community).

You're setting up a straw man here. "etoysville.com" is your  
invention, I have not seen a request for a different domain name.

> 1. etoysville.com would siphon away a significant number of visitors  
> from squeakland.org

Now you're fighting your own straw man. If the community site is a  
section on squeakland.org this is a non-issue.

> 2. squeakland.org will be able to have callout boxes around the site  
> with random public projects
>
> It's very easy to have projects appear on the home page and perhaps  
> even within a sidebar on all pages on the official website.   This  
> will draw people to the showcase and keep the site looking fresh and  
> alive, which is always a good thing.  The more people see fresh  
> content, the more they will return to the website.

Obviously. Hence the showcase is part of the official site. And it  
would be no problem to link to selected show case projects from the  
community pages.

> 3. "squeakland" as a name is already well suited to connote community

Fighting the straw man again. It was not suggested to replace  
"squeakland".

> 4. having *lots* of fresh, compelling content is good PR for  
> squeakland foundation
>
>   If there's two sites to choose from, there will always be the "who  
> should I give money to" confusion,

More straw. You're painting this as Squeakland vs Community which is  
far from the truth.

> 5. having the showcase allows us to integrate with other  
> squeakland.org functionality

As I wrote to etoys-dev:

"Sure it can be implemented as [one system] behind the scenes, but the  
public sharing site needs to be clearly separated, and hence visually  
different from the edited site."

The only difference to what you proposed would be another skin. There  
is no technical reason not to visually distinguish the community pages  
from the redacted showcase. Heck, just a different color scheme could  
be enough.

> 6. having two sites will make ongoing maintenance more difficult or  
> less likely to happen

Straw men. See 5.

> 7. duplication of content is inevitable with two sites

Again, it's the same site, no duplication of content.

> 8. it's just confusing to have two sites

And more of the same. There is only one site, partitioned into  
redacted and community content.

> 9. the new site will draw google rank away from squeakland.org

Ditto. There is no "new" site.

> 10. having one site helps us enforce a simple & clear navigation  
> structure

This is something we have to look out for, true. But on the official  
pages I'd place a prominent link to the community section, and vice  
versa. So switching between the two should be rather simple.

Precisely. We're in violent agreement on this it seems.

I don't think any developer volunteered lately for this job. So this  
not an accurate picture of the current situation.

> C) squeakland is built on storymill, which is not "free and open  
> source" or written in Squeak itself

That has not been brought up in a while to my knowledge, so I don't  
know why you are digging it out again.

I prefer open systems, yes, because integrating with the larger Free/
Open Source Software community is our only way to sustainability.

But we are not considering switching for the near future. We agreed to  
try SM and JIRA and Confluence for as long as necessary to reach a  
good understanding of what we want.

In any case, if we would consider another system in the future (and we  
are not, at this time) it would not mean at all this would not live  
under the Squeakland home. Err, that were too many "not"s. In other  
words: Any future system would still live on squeakland.org.

> And the last reason, which has not been publicly stated, but I  
> suspect exists . . .
>
> D) some people are frustrated with me personally and want the  
> freedom to change things without me saying "well, what about so and  
> so"

I appreciate how you are trying to get this discussion onto objective  
grounds, and we should continue that way.

> Let us know what you think about the two site plan.  I really am  
> open to the idea, but want my ten points above countered before  
> making such a drastic step.


Consider that done.

Really, you're making a much bigger problem of this than necessary. If  
our education director wants the community pages to be visually  
distinct, who are we to argue that? ;)

- Bert -


_______________________________________________
squeakland mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland

On Sep 2, 2009, at 11:46 AM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:


My apologies if a separate site was never desired by you, Rita, or a  
few others.   I'm responding not just to recent discussions on etoys-
dev, but many, many talks within the last year, where a separate site  
seemed wished for.   It's possible that repeated use of terms like  
"project server" and "community site" simply helped to create this  
impression, along with resistance to the new showcase given  
superswiki2 and michael's system.

I'm surprised to hear "we only meant a new skin".  I've heard requests  
for special functionality, and frustration with the existing site, and  
a desire for a different navigation structure for the community site,  
which all led to my assuming a "separate garden" was desired.  (I'm  
pretty sure I'm not the only one that came to the same conclusion.)

The clearest way to proceed is with specifics.   Say exactly what you  
want, with details.   What is the difference in look?   Do we still  
have the same "chrome" (logo and nav), but with different colors?    
Does the new section/site have different top-level sections?    What  
exactly is different?

Also, please elaborate on why you think this needs to be done.   If  
possible, cite other examples where such an approach was beneficial  
(and where the separation wasn't just a matter of the corporate  
marketing wonks wanting to make sure that their message wasn't  
confused with the community stuff.)

At this point, I can't see the need for it . . . it feels like it'd  
lead to confusion, or at least an inconsistent split, complicating the  
nav struture and sense of place ... the featured showcase would behave  
nearly identically with public showcase, but it'd look different and  
have a different navigation structure.

Show me what I'm missing.  The best way to do this is with an HTML  
mockup or napkin drawing or balsamiq mockup (or Etoys project :)

Take care,
Tim

_______________________________________________
squeakland mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland

On Sep 2, 2009, at 2:06 PM, Timothy Falconer wrote:


I should also say that I took the time to lay out the reasons against  
splitting the site so that we'd have something to point to when the  
topic comes up again, which it likely will (and why I put it on the  
wiki).
_______________________________________________
squeakland mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland

Am 02.09.2009 um 20:06 schrieb Timothy Falconer:

My apologies for being not clear enough on what I mean. I'm really  
glad that we talk about the topic now, because to have it written down  
will make everything more transparent. I wasn't sure on which of the  
emails I should respond, I will refer to the other mails from here.

First thing: my main concern is user experience. Everything I propose  
or request is because I think it is useful for our community and our  
users. So to have two different "sections" does not refer to different  
servers. Bert did explain what I mean on his mail, so I will not  
repeat it here.
>
> The clearest way to proceed is with specifics.   Say exactly what  
> you want, with details.   What is the difference in look?   Do we  
> still have the same "chrome" (logo and nav), but with different  
> colors?    Does the new section/site have different top-level  
> sections?    What exactly is different?

I think about difference in look (doesn't have to be *that* different,  
but distinguishable from the "official" section). So of course we  
should have our logo there. But the navigation will not be the same.  
The whole reason for two sections is, that they will serve different  
purposes.

The official section is about first impression (your elevator pitch,  
Tim!, great projects, news), guidance (courseware, relations to  
curriculum, documentation etc.) and professionalism (for potential  
sponsors etc.), and therefore the squeakland website is very good!

The community section is all about involvement, sharing and getting to  
know eachother. It is more like a gathering place. Therefore I think  
we need some new ideas for structuring the pages. I don't want to add  
the functionality to the existing navigation structure because it will  
become to much. So my ideas for the community section:

There will always be the link back to the official section, and we can  
keep some of the navigation from the official section in the community  
section (forums for example, surely more). But we need navigation  
links for all the functionality which will be special on the community  
section (typical social network stuff, in fact, what Marta wrote up in  
her Email some time ago and what you can see here: http://wiki.squeakland.org/display/sq/Project+Server+discussion)
:

- log in to the community section to create or change your own profile
- find other users ( their profiles, projects or just people with like  
interests or from the same country etc.)
- upload your projects, but every project you like to share without  
having to worry about quality
- tags
- easy ways to give feedback, like comments on projects
- users can become more involved by getting more and more control over  
the community section


>
> Also, please elaborate on why you think this needs to be done.   If  
> possible, cite other examples where such an approach was beneficial  
> (and where the separation wasn't just a matter of the corporate  
> marketing wonks wanting to make sure that their message wasn't  
> confused with the community stuff.)

The distinction would be between "guidance" - "exploration" or  
"controlled by Squeakland Foundation" - "controlled by the community".

And like you wrote in your other mail, Tim, I also like to have it  
written down somewhere. It will make further discussion much easier  
and hopefully prevent misunderstanding better.

Greetings,
Rita
Rita Freudenberg
[hidden email]



_______________________________________________
squeakland mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland

On Sep 2, 2009, at 4:35 PM, Rita Freudenberg wrote:

> - log in to the community section to create or change your own profile

Already works in beta, though haven't enabled photo yet.

> - find other users ( their profiles, projects or just people with  
> like interests or from the same country etc.)

Haven't added this, but it's very easy.   Could go into a more general  
search box/page also.

> - upload your projects, but every project you like to share without  
> having to worry about quality

Already works in beta, though I think you're referring to a new look  
as indicator you can "mess up the room".

> - tags

Already implemented, though I haven't surfaced these in the beta yet  
(would take an hour or two)

> - easy ways to give feedback, like comments on projects

Comments can be added by flicking a switch.  The hold up was our  
decision to moderate comments.  If you don't need moderation yet, we  
can add comments immediately.

> - users can become more involved by getting more and more control  
> over the community section

Other than adding comments and tags and projects, what do you foresee?

As it stands, we'll need more and more moderators to help approve  
projects for public display.  We'll need people to rank and feature  
projects too.   These are two ways people can contribute.


Four overall points:

1) everything you mention is applicable to the featured showcase as  
well.  Why wouldn't you have all these things there as well?

2) everything (except search users) has already been incorporated in  
showcase design, based on your suggestions in the past (and marta's)

3) Storymill has LOTS of social networking functionality that already  
works . . . it's a matter of flipping it on and surfacing the  
functionality on specific pages.

4) Please let's at least see the working showcase site in action  
before discussing what it still needs :)     Most of what you want has  
already been done.

Take care,
Tim



_______________________________________________
squeakland mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland

Given that people are asking for a separate "section" with a separate  
navigation structure and look, some of my ten points are moot, but  
others still apply.

On Sep 2, 2009, at 10:45 AM, Timothy Falconer wrote:

While the domain won't be different, the new navigation will by  
necessity obscure some of the "official" links we want people to see  
and click, like download and donate.


The callouts will be just as easy, but the confusion point still  
remains . . . click a callout and "why did I change to another website?"


The name isn't an issue now, but the separate of "official" and  
"community" still has the same problem . . . I want the official site  
to have the messy stuff too.  I want to *see* the people throughout.


Mostly moot, but the clickthrough counts will fall without the same  
nav throughout.


Moot.

Mostly moot, though less time will be spent on the official pages,  
though this would likely happen anyway with just a showcase section.

> 7. duplication of content is inevitable with two sites
>
> Splitting efforts like this generally leads to duplication of  
> effort, where, for example, someone down the road decides to add a  
> community blog on etoysville.com and it ends up drawing attention  
> (and life) from squeakland's blog, etc.   As much as we say "we  
> won't compete, we won't duplicate", it's pretty much inevitable,  
> particularly when the new site gets several orders of magnitude more  
> traffic than the official one.

There will be less duplication, but still a "why isn't this on the  
official pages" tension.  My desire is to have the "official" site  
*be* the community site.

> 8. it's just confusing to have two sites
>
> People will always end up on one site or the other, wondering where  
> something on the other site is.   People won't know which site to go  
> to, or where to put content, etc.     You can say, "this is the  
> project server" as loud as you want, and there will always be people  
> who get confused by two sites.

The confusion will be the same.   What's under "community", what's  
under "tutorials", what's under "resources"?

Moot. Though if we really make them seem like different sites, people  
will feel compelled to link to both, or just one.   Google will still  
like us though.


This is still my biggest complaint.   What people are essentially  
saying is, I want a place to a whole new nav, with a bunch of new  
sections and pages.   This is still a loss from a usability standpoint.

My solution was to put *one* extra link "public", to a section that  
works exactly like the "featured" section.  Both sections work  
identically, within the same website design and navigation structure.


_______________________________________________
squeakland mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland

As an eToys user you can count me as this "few". I strongly agree with this idea, and believe eToys has been pretty late in this decision. The websites does not necessarily be hosted on seperate domains. But all can be handled with subdomains.

village.squeakland.org,  projects.squeakland.org, forum.squeakland.org, wiki.squeakland.org, blogs.squeakland.org, info.squekland.org,  www.squeakland.org . etc.

> As with all suggestions, I'm open to ideas, but in this
> particular case, I'd like some serious community discussion
> about this.  I'd like there to be solid, compelling,
> reasons for such a move.

> Here are the reasons I'm against "splitting the baby", as
> IMO would happen if we make two sites.  I'll
> distinguish as squeakland.org (official) and etoysville.com
> (community).

I will not go in details below, one by one as you suggested. I would instead compare eToys with Scratch which is a project launched later than eToys and based on Squeak code.  

Scratch has been a huge success perhaps because of it's community website. The community website is not a separate domain as suggested above but is the main site. It includes areas for official announcements but the majority of site is composed of project area with more than 500.000 projects hosted.  The second major part of the site is forum and both use  unified login. Projects are uploaded right from within the application. Projects are shared and hosted with Creative Commons licence which allows recycling and use for educational purposes.

The official areas of the site include blog, downloads, translations, research, info, credits, quotes, news, store, donations, conference, scratch day & learning materials.

The important question to be answered is does VPRI or sponsors behind eToys project have enough financial and man power resources to launch such a major project with huge design, hosting and maintenance demands? And are they willing to do so.

Nevit Dilmen

Ref:
http://scratch.mit.edu/
http://llk.media.mit.edu/projects.php?id=2115 
http://llk.media.mit.edu/projects.php?id=783



      ___________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Türkiye açıldı!  http://yahoo.com.tr
İnternet üzerindeki en iyi içeriği Yahoo! Türkiye sizlere sunuyor!
_______________________________________________
squeakland mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland

On Sep 2, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Nevit Dilmen wrote:


Nevit,

We *will* be launching a public showcase in the next two weeks, where  
users can share directly from Etoys.  This is a major feature of the  
new release.

The debate is about whether these public projects show on a separate  
website or seperate-looking section.

I'm in favor of the Scratch way (integrated as a major part of the  
main site).   Others want the look and navigation to be different than  
the main website, to feel like a separate place than the main website.

I agree that a public showcase has been a long time coming.  Our  
proposal for last year's website redesign included a Scratch-like  
public showcase, with features such as curriculum overlays.   This  
part was cut largely because VPRI didn't feel they had the manpower to  
moderate a public showcase effectively.

Now that control has been passed to Squeakland Foundation, we're  
creating this public showcase as one of our first, top, priorities.

Take care,
Tim



_______________________________________________
squeakland mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland

Hi,

 we already have two names, which is kind of a problem some times. I
wouldn´t vote for two websites.
A section inside the current website makes more sense to me.

Marta

-----Mensagem original-----
De: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] Em nome de Timothy Falconer
Enviada em: quarta-feira, 2 de setembro de 2009 11:45
Para: squeakland.org mailing list
Assunto: [squeakland] on having two squeakland websites

Hi everyone,

A few people have been suggesting that Squeakland should have two  
websites, the "official" site we have now, and a new "community"  
website with a different look & navigation scheme.

As with all suggestions, I'm open to ideas, but in this particular  
case, I'd like some serious community discussion about this.  I'd like  
there to be solid, compelling, reasons for such a move.

Here are the reasons I'm against "splitting the baby", as IMO would  
happen if we make two sites.  I'll distinguish as squeakland.org  
(official) and etoysville.com (community).


1. etoysville.com would siphon away a significant number of visitors  
from squeakland.org

The single biggest boost in squeakland.org website traffic will be the  
public showcase, because of its social networking potential.  When  
everyone can upload Etoys projects and easily email their friends and  
family and post on facebook and myspace about it, etc, our traffic  
numbers will grow exponentially from what we're experiencing now.    
IMO, it is to the benefit of Squeakland that these new visitors come  
to squeakland.org, where they can see "download", "contact", "about",  
"tutorials", "donate", etc.  They will be much more likely to click  
such links than they would if there was a single "squeakland" link  
from etoysville.com back to squeakland.org.


2. squeakland.org will be able to have callout boxes around the site  
with random public projects

It's very easy to have projects appear on the home page and perhaps  
even within a sidebar on all pages on the official website.   This  
will draw people to the showcase and keep the site looking fresh and  
alive, which is always a good thing.  The more people see fresh  
content, the more they will return to the website.  Yes, we could  
achieve the same thing with RSS between sites, but there's two  
problems here.  First, clicking the link draws visitors away from
squeakland.org
, which decreases the chance they will click "donate", "come to  
squeakfest", or any of the other links we want them to see.  Second,  
clicking such a link and finding yourself at a different website with  
a different look & feel is confusing to new visitors.  Remember that  
our target audience is largely non-technical.  We could make it  
somewhat clear from the callout box, but my first point still applies.


3. "squeakland" as a name is already well suited to connote community

 From the start, I've always seen squeakland.org as a shared website  
for everyone, not just the sandbox for arbitrarily selected team  
members :)    Having hundreds of new voices scattered throughout the  
site is a very positive move.   It will generate a strong feeling of  
community for anyone that first visits the site (and we want first  
time visitors to show up where the "download" and "donate" links  
are.   Put another way, I want squeakland.org to resemble New York  
City more than Los Angeles .... the former has lots of people walking  
the streets, the latter has almost no pedestrians in evidence.   I  
*want* to see the people.


4. having *lots* of fresh, compelling content is good PR for  
squeakland foundation

As we try to raise money from corporations, government organizations,  
and individuals, it would hurt us to have the "10,000+ projects"  
number located on another website with a different look and apparent  
group.   If there's two sites to choose from, there will always be the  
"who should I give money to" confusion, or more likely, "I don't need  
to give money because it looks like they're volunteer community is  
much stronger than their official representation."  One of the most  
impressive things about the Scratch site is the "number of projects"  
box, which simply says "SUCCESS" to new visitors.    Their large  
number of projects, and the way it's integrated into their main site,  
is IMO a big reason for their success.  People see people using it,  
and so they say, "neat, I'll try it."


5. having the showcase allows us to integrate with other  
squeakland.org functionality

Everyone who creates a showcase account has an option to subscribe to  
our newsletter.  The more subscriptions to our newsletter, the better  
our ability to keep Etoys in people's minds and promote events like  
Squeakfest.   My plan was to have a weekly "best of" email that goes  
out to interested people that contains five or so new projects from  
the showcase.  This can already be done with the current website.    
Also, anyone who clicks through such emails will go to squeakland.org,  
not etoysville.org, which means we're driving traffic to the site we  
want action from, not a separate site.   Other functionality includes  
the ability to make multi-language descriptions for all projects, etc,  
etc.


6. having two sites will make ongoing maintenance more difficult or  
less likely to happen

People tend to improve what's right in front of them, so if the bulk  
of the time from our community is spent on a separate community site,  
then they'll spend less and less time on squeakland.org, hence they'll  
be less likely to volunteer to improve content, see typos, or  
whatever.   Also, there will be a natural "us vs them" vibe that gets  
started, where squeakland.org will be seen more as the "suits" site  
that's not really the real volunteer site.  (as with OLPC)


7. duplication of content is inevitable with two sites

Splitting efforts like this generally leads to duplication of effort,  
where, for example, someone down the road decides to add a community  
blog on etoysville.com and it ends up drawing attention (and life)  
from squeakland's blog, etc.   As much as we say "we won't compete, we  
won't duplicate", it's pretty much inevitable, particularly when the  
new site gets several orders of magnitude more traffic than the  
official one.


8. it's just confusing to have two sites

People will always end up on one site or the other, wondering where  
something on the other site is.   People won't know which site to go  
to, or where to put content, etc.     You can say, "this is the  
project server" as loud as you want, and there will always be people  
who get confused by two sites.


9. the new site will draw google rank away from squeakland.org

With google, who links to you is what determines how high up on the  
list you place.    Having LOTS of people linking to their projects on  
their blogs, facebook, etc, will help squeakland's google rank  
immeasurably.   You'll be able to type "educational software" in  
Google and actually show up in the first or second page.   Not so if  
we split the sites . . . the community one will always win.   Also,  
having two sites makes it confusing for other sites when determining  
which site to link to.   Schools will want to link to their group on  
the project server . . . requiring them to put both the squeakland  
website and the community site is cumbersome, and won't always happen


10. having one site helps us enforce a simple & clear navigation  
structure

One of my primary roles at my work is warning clients about making  
their site architecture & navigation too cluttered.   The general  
trend is always to add this page, and this section, and this other  
thing, all of which sounds like a good idea at the time, but people  
forget the big picture . . . the first time visitor.    I force them  
to keep things within the "rule of fives", where the top three levels  
of navigation must fit within logical groupings, so that there's only  
so many misclicks before people find stuff.   Usability is the "art of  
the obvious", and it's HARD to imagine how people use a site.  You  
need hallway reviews, and stats analysis, etc, etc.    With a separate  
community site, there's a greater danger that it'll turn into the OLPC  
wiki, where it's much too hard to find things of value.   Yes, you can  
say, "the community committee can enforce usability", but I'll just  
point you back to #6 above.  They can help squeakland.org too.


Anyway, these are my major points.  There's other ones like  
scalability, stats gathering, load balancing, ease of updates, single  
point of monitoring, etc, but these are really extensions of #6.  
Also, we already have a wiki, which is community generated, so we're  
really talking about THREE squeakland websites, not two.  (and yes, I  
know that #8 applies to having a wiki ... it's a concern of mine)


What reasons are there for having two sites?

I can see five possible reasons so far:


A) it will make the volunteer community feel more empowered to have  
their own garden to grow, leading to more effort by these volunteers.

My response to this is that we should make squeakland.org more  
appealing to volunteers, if it isn't already, primarily for the  
reasons above, particularly #6.


B) not invented here

Some of us want to design & write the software underlying the  
community site, or at least customize some other software, because  
it's fun and fulfilling, and would be good for local installations.

As with SuperSwiki2 and Michael Rueger's system, Squeakland encourages  
such efforts and will help promote their use in local installations.    
For the reasons listed above, I'd still prefer to have the centralized  
project server be integrated with the primary website.  Also, do the  
wants of a handful of developers really outweigh the needs of a much  
larger community?   I need a more compelling reason than "because I  
just want to".


C) squeakland is built on storymill, which is not "free and open  
source" or written in Squeak itself

My company, Immuexa, is not charging Squeakland for Storymill, and  
we've given quite a bit of free labor to add Squeakland specific  
enhancements, such as requests by the folks in Brasil for their  
Squeakfest site.   Immuexa has a team of paid developers that  
continually enhance Storymill as they work on other client  
projects . . . in other words, Storymill's continued improvement is  
paid for by corporate clients.    Storymill is production ready, using  
the same technology as used by such sites as Bank of America and  
Travelocity, etc.   We can make *need-based* changes to Storymill very  
quickly, and safely . . . either by me or any of my staff.    There's  
LOTS of functionality in Storymill that we're not yet using, it  
combines elements of many social networking, CMS, email & contact  
marketing sites ... lots of stuff.   If things were switched to Squeak  
and Seaside, me and my staff would no longer be able to help in this  
way.

That said, if the larger community really feels strongly that all  
things Squeakland should be free and open source, and written in  
Squeak, then I'd at least ask:

1. that the replacement(s) is immediately capable of replicating all  
of the functionality of the existing Squeakland website

2. that someone else spends the time needed to migrate all existing  
data to the new system (we'll give you database access & SSH, of course)

3. that you carefully consider that the vast majority of our users  
really don't care what's under the hood . . . it's a tool like  
Dreamweaver or JIRA.

4. that you consider that the effort needed for such a switch could be  
better spent on improving Etoys itself


And the last reason, which has not been publicly stated, but I suspect  
exists . . .

D) some people are frustrated with me personally and want the freedom  
to change things without me saying "well, what about so and so"

In the end, it usually comes down to personal feelings about creative  
control and interpersonal dynamics.  In the last nine months, I've had  
many people express appreciation for the way I'm doing things, but  
also a few who seem to bristle whenever I open my mouth.   My style of  
spoken delivery is strong, and people can often mistake passion for  
arrogance or the need to be right.   I'm fully aware of such things.    
Behind the passion and apparent obstinance, there's actually a great  
willingness to listen to other opinions and change my opinions  
completely, which if you listen long enough, you'll see happen often.  
I'm a proud flip-flopper.    I tend to see many, many factors all at  
once (as this email may show), and my ability to express them in  
person is not always up to the task, so people sometimes assume that  
I'm just being difficult and, even worse, not respecting their  
opinion.   I really do respect all opinions (even the anti-OLPC guy).  
My willingness to put other opinions to the test is really a sign of  
respect, not disrespect.   And of course, I can completely disagree  
and still respect your opinion.  Why people link the two is a mystery  
to me.

Since the most negative remarks seem to come from the people who have  
already given the most to Etoys, I tend to believe what someone told  
me a while back, that "we're all going through different kinds of  
separation anxiety", and that at least a part of the negativity comes  
from a "who is this guy, and why is he telling me what to do"  
feeling.  It hasn't been easy taking the reins from such a talented  
and selfless group.   And of course there's always "I just don't like  
him" too, which is inevitable in some cases.

My answer to all of this is simply:  let's talk about it.  I'd rather  
hear that you don't like me, then perceive it in your body language or  
tone of voice.  Such disagreements are usually helped by frank and  
honest conversation.  They usually stem from misunderstandings, which  
can only be helped by talking things out.  So Skype me and say, "You  
piss me off because . . ." and I'll be glad to hear it.

Anyway, this is a long email.  If you've read the whole thing, I'm  
impressed.  Thank you.

Let us know what you think about the two site plan.  I really am open  
to the idea, but want my ten points above countered before making such  
a drastic step.

Take care,
Tim
_______________________________________________
squeakland mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland

_______________________________________________
squeakland mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland

  I finally read the thread...

> 8. it's just confusing to have two sites

  Maybe this is only the real one and other 9 or 8 items are
concequences of it?

> C) squeakland is built on storymill, which is not "free and open  
> source" or written in Squeak itself

  Did anybody say that?  There was "what you write is different from
what I read" aspect in some conversations, but if you are implying
what I wrote sometime before, what I wrote was "an openly-available
platform" so that one developer can control (by that I meant that the
developer can test and look at both the server (like logs and error
messages) and client, and not putting anybody on the critical path.

  But, as people agreed, we go with the plan.  So, the question comes
down to "when" we really work on it and make it work.  Can you tell me
(or some other developer) when you have quality time so that can work
together?

-- Yoshiki

> And the last reason, which has not been publicly stated, but I suspect  
> exists . . .
>
> D) some people are frustrated with me personally and want the freedom  
> to change things without me saying "well, what about so and so"

  Well, *if* you follow what you wrote below, you probably name "some
people", so that not leaving everybody in the community wondering
"hmm, maybe my body language really sucks and I'm giving wrong
impression on Tim?"

  But no, don't do that.  Instead, you should just try to "read" what
is written as it is, and not to "interpret" too much.  That is the key
of text-based technical conversation.

-- Yoshiki
_______________________________________________
squeakland mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland

Timothy Falconer wrote:
> I'm in favor of the Scratch way (integrated as a major part of the
> main site).   Others want the look and navigation to be different than
> the main website, to feel like a separate place than the main website.
>
The Scratch website http://scratch.mit.edu/ was never made to be used by
educators, but by the community. That's what I would like the public
section of the squeakland showcase to be. But there is a new website
from the Scratch team dedicated to educators
http://scratched.media.mit.edu/ That would be the official section of
squeakland.
So *they* made the decision to split. For now, our website is more like
the educators place and I'm afraid we will loose our clear structure and
guidance when we evolve to a community website.
While we are at it, there surely is another target audience who is not
addressed yet on the website: the developers. There have been
discussions on how to help people find what they look for on the website
right on the starting page.  So there could be a kind of splitting right
there. See these sites as examples:

http://www.sugarlabs.org/ (links at the bottom of the page)
http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Getting_Involved (not the
starting page, but a very nice idea I think). Actually, the idea is
inspired from Fedora: http://fedoraproject.org/en/join-fedora

In Scratch, it is more subtle, just a picture link to ScratchEd at the
right pane: http://scratch.mit.edu/

These are some examples for addressing certain audiences. We should
discuss whom we would like to address and how to do that.

Rita


--
Rita Freudenberg
FIN-ISG
Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg
http://isgwww.cs.uni-magdeburg.de/isg/rita.html

_______________________________________________
squeakland mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/squeakland