Re: On the Interaction with the design team

[Allan Day <allanpday gmail com>]

Frederic Muller wrote:
> On 06/07/2011 04:53 PM, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
> > Also, while I'm not a designer, yesterday I wanted to propose some new
> > stuff, and it was easy to get the design team to find a solution for
> > proposals (https://live.gnome.org/Design/Proposals  ), so from my (short)
> > experience they seem to be open to listen to new ideas.
> 
> Hi!
> 
> I don't think the discussion is about the design team not being open but 
> more about the decision process and understanding how choices are being 
> made.
> 
> I'll take the example of the power off menu. From my discussion with 
> some members of the design team I have been told the disappearance of 
> the power off menu was pushed without much discussion just before a 
> freeze.

There was some discussion, but you don't always have the
luxury of having extended debate about every issue when you're about to
freeze a dot oh. :)

> The current bug has 67 comments 
> (https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=643457 ) all asking for a 
> power off menu except 2.
> 
> As a foundation member and supporter of GNOME I don't even know myself 
> how to give a feedback that matters and join the hundreds unhappy 
> contributors with this decision (users spend hours looking at how they 
> can power off their machine, talk about good UX...), nor can I point 
> anyone to a method to give feedback that matters that would help to get 
> our voice heard.

I think you've got to the crux of the issue here Fred. Actually though,
I don't think the problem is listening as much as speaking. The people
who have made these decisions are fully aware of peoples' opinions and
feelings. All the feedback gets read. What is missing is a response
that communicates that that feedback has been taken seriously and which
evaluates the various options that are available to us.

> Were there any UX testing report available that motivated this decision?

This kind of statement implies that if designers don't scientifically
prove the validity of their work they aren't allowed to do it at all.
More user testing would be great, but that's often not an option.

> Was it really a minority decision? Why?

The decision was made by the shell design team (which is Jon and
Jimmac with Jon in charge), and then ratified (so to speak) by Owen in
his role as shell maintainer. That's pretty much as things should be
in my view, and it's largely in accordance with how things generally
get done in GNOME.

> Why can't it be reverted if so? 

There's no principle that says a design can't be changed (though the
practicality of that varies from issue to issue, of course.)

> What is the process?

People want to feel like they are a part of GNOME and they want to know
that the designers who are working on the project give a shit. I'm
honestly not sure whether bureaucracy is the best way to achieve that.
Again: we already know what the issues are and we know how people feel
about them. The part that is missing is the response.

> I am also someone that would be happy to see a trackable system 
> implemented which we could go back to, read and understand, and provide 
> meaningful feedback to.

I think I've answered what I think of that above.

I've expended all the energy I have on this thread. I won't be
participating any further, though I will continue to work to improve
things on the design side.

Allan
-- 
IRC: aday on irc.gnome.org
Blog: http://afaikblog.wordpress.com/