Surely the personas approach is not the perfect solution to our problems, but maybe is one of the best apporach we can deal with now, with our current resources and budget. In any case it sounds like the most """scientific""" approach we have done to the marketing problem, according to some trustful oldtimers of this list (marketing is not a scientific discipline by itself, but scientific methodology are helpful to achieve marketing goals - or at leats make you fee more comfortable about the quality of your marketing work). Like with any other development, we shouldn't aspire to anything else than a first, intiially useful beta version to be pushed to a commonly agreed v1.0 stage, knowing hat one day we may have a v2.0 and laugh at what we had released previously as a beta. It's part of the learning process. As a Marketing Team member here is my vote to consider the personas research as our primary goal in the field of Theory for 2006, being this project only questioned if somebody comes with a better alternative and a gateway to move from the work done to that alternative (unless this somebody convinces with scientific arguments that what we have done until now with personas is scientific useless). This doesn't mean we can't criticise MarketingPersonas. Constructive critique is needed as always, including improvements or alternatives to the critique. Assuming that the work won't stop easily now that it's been started. Otherwise the people working on it are going to waste a good bunch of their energies in this to-be-or-not-to-be dilemma. In the meantime, the Marketing Team should keep promoting GNOME in Practice, as good as we can. Agreeing 2-3 main projects to be developed/continued in 2006 while the personas report is being cooked would be very useful. >>Sorry to butt in here, but I am not sure of the value of this exercise. -- Quim Gil - http://desdeamericaconamor.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature