Is there some page to see the questions only, so I don't scroll myself to death?
(No TOC, generic HTML without IDs, question is sometimes 1st or 2nd or 3rd table row so I cannot scrap the DOM to extract them.)

There must be a doc somewhere with the questions we sent to Ed, no?

I think that all of the questions are at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement_Insights/2016-17_Report/Technical_Collaborations

There are some comments on the talk page (including a proposal for a new question), and more at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Johan_(WMF)/CE_Insights_and_Tech_News

Alright, after a first pass through https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement_Insights/2016-17_Report/Technical_Collaborations#Technical_contributors ...

I think we need to align the survey questions with our current plans. We also should ask less questions. And we should not ask in CE Insights what we are asking in a more focused context e.g. questions for technical event participants and for new developers.

I have tried to list the existing questions in three groups (see the description of this task):

• Questions to be kept. They might still need review and fine tuning, but they are relevant and useful.
• Questions to be discussed / improved. They might be kept after some improvement, or maybe after some discussion we decide that they can be discarded.
• Questions to be removed, because we don't get anything actionable out of them, participation is expected to be always too low, are better asked in other contexts, are not relevant anymore...

All these are suggestions, of course. Feedback welcome, better at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Engagement_Insights/2016-17_Report/Technical_Collaborations

Next, I will comment on existing proposals and start new ones. I will also scan our annual plan programs to inform the discussion about questions to be improved or discarded, as well as to find potential new questions missing.

I've done an analysis of the Tech News-related results on Meta. Based on that, T175779 contains my recommendations for Tech News and CE Insights. In short, 224 and 225 should change "Meta:Tech/News" to "Tech News" or "The Tech News newsletter". 517 is fine as it is from a Tech News perspective. 529.01 is probably fine as it is.

530 is far less useful if only technical contributors are asked the question. It should either get a wider audience (it's even more relevant if non-technical editors are reading the newsletter sporadically, as those involved in technical spaces are more likely to hear about news in other ways). More people should be asked this question. If that is not possible and we need to ask fewer questions, I think it can be removed.

Is this task also about replying to the questions at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement_Insights/2016-17_Report/Technical_Collaborations#Key_Findings_from_the_Technical_Collaboration_team ?

Yes, for now this task is about Everything TC & CE Insights.

Quick draft here before I propose these questions properly in the spreadsheet. Some of these questions are existing (as is or modified) and some of them are new.

FOR EVERYONE

1. Types of contributions in the last 12 months
2. How do you receive updates about software features?
3. Most efficient ways to provide feedback to developers?
4. The Wikimedia Foundation collaborates well with Wikimedia communities to develop software (agree/disagree)
5. Are you satisfied/dissatisfied with the software developed by the Wikimedia Foundation?

FOR EDITORS

1. Technical Collaboration Guidance awareness / satisfaction
2. Tech ambassadors awareness / satisfaction
3. Tech Translators awareness / satisfaction

FOR TECH CONTRIBUTORS

1. What motivated you to start contributing?
2. Preferred programming languages?
3. Preferred focus areas? (extensions, gadgets, mobile...)
4. Preferred channels for developer support?
5. A question about usefulness of developer documentation
6. The Wikimedia technical community is friendly/unfriendly
7. The Wikimedia Foundation collaborates well with volunteer developers to build software (agree/disagree)

Everyone #5 - we can't determine whether people know which software is Foundation's and which one isn't. Also, bad interactions between WMF and volunteer software means a bad experience overall. Finally, user's setting is also important. It looks more like a question that other teams would want to ask.

Note that we had asked this question to Technical Contributors in the previous edition, getting a fair amount of responses (considering the low numbers for that audience in general): Question 555 (TC01) Overall, to what extent are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the software developed by the Wikimedia Foundation?

I propose the same question for all audiences and not only Technical Contributors because I think it is interesting to capture that sentiment across Wikimedia. I understand that people might not know what is the software developed by the WMF versus the rest. They might not even distinguish between new software being developed vs what they use and has existed for years. What we are after is an assessment about their subjective feelings as users, not an objective assessment about the software. Therefore, what about this:

* Overall, to what extent are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the software you use in Wikimedia?

When it comes to which team should ask this question, this is ultimately irrelevant as long as the question appears in the survey. I think it is our interest to assure this, because the question is pertinent, and our work will be easier (and somehow better?) if we can show good results and a positive trend in this question.

Drafting continues in a spreadsheet.

A reminder that this is still on October's board, so it could either be moved or closed based on what's left to do. Thank you!