- User Since
- Sep 22 2014, 8:42 PM (330 w, 5 d)
- IRC Nick
- LDAP User
- MediaWiki User
Apr 5 2016
Helped result in this: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Rdicerb_%28WMF%29/sandbox/CL_Toolkit/Epic_Newsletter
Mar 14 2016
The current thinking is that we do a flat count for Q4, and while doing so consider ways of qualifying the discussions had, with a proposal of how to qualify these conversations beginning Q1'16/17.
On office pages as well, which contains useful info not not available to public.
Thank you @Elitre! There are also some listed instructions on Office that I want to look at closely (I haven't done translations, myself, so I have a less informed viewpoint) :)
Current thinking: this looks more like an instruction manual than a toolkit.
Mar 7 2016
Pending Q4 Goals conversation with team on 7 March
Mar 2 2016
Currently lives in: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Rdicerb_%28WMF%29/sandbox/CL_Toolkit
Back to you, Quim, as there is the Dev Rel element to this task that I think yourself, Rachel F or Andre will have a better answer to.
CLs updated KPIs: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Liaisons/KPIs
Mar 1 2016
Feb 24 2016
Beginning to work through here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Rdicerb_%28WMF%29/sandbox/CL_Toolkit
In a couple of session some team members gathered to recommend a new CL KPI. The current thinking is that we may count "major conversations" that the team participates in for individual products, but the definition of what constitutes a major conversation needs to be clarified.
@Rfarrand - can you post the Hackathon page here for easy reference?
@Rfarrand that;s a good idea, and perhaps onsite you could offer tags or buttons:
Feb 17 2016
@Whatamidoing-WMF - you are raising a good point around the customer service metric, thank you for always bringing your ideas to this! There's more information the KPI page. Might be better to hold the conversation there?
Feb 12 2016
Feb 10 2016
Let's look at this for Q4
Working on PDP and toolkit process; working on this afterwards
Closing due to the fact that we won't be using this
@egalvezwmf - you mention focusing on primary audiences - but they may change depending on the product. For example, with a VE survey that happened a year ago, we focused on a few different audiences, including those who made the most edits using VE, users who have given feedback on VE, etc. We found that finding those specific groups of users allowed for higher engagement (I believe it was something like a 25% response rate), but because we used targeted talk page messages, we could probably not do that frequently.
Feb 9 2016
Technical Collaboration (keeping CL and DR subgroups): https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Technical_Collaboration
Begin in private when there is a security or privacy issue which needs to be worked out prior to discussing publicly.
Feb 4 2016
For Core work, consistency around the Liaisons' work in product development (Project/initiative 1) will add cohesion. The pages listed here are not inclusive or consistent with the engagement that's actually happening across the products.
Feb 3 2016
This is just about ready, so sending it over to Tech/News.
Jan 28 2016
The metrics that CLs are collecting are not ideal, as they measure community activity rather than the team's. The challenge faced is that we don't have easy tools for measuring staff activity. One example of possible KPI is "time to first response on Talk page" - that isn't easily measurable without a script (that I'm aware of).
Jan 27 2016
Jan 21 2016
Jan 19 2016
Agreed. I think it's just best to shut this one down for now - if it comes up again, we can revisit/re-open/reconsider.
Unless Community Tech wants to use this system again, I would say no. @DannyH and @kaldari - might there be any interest in using AllOurIdeas for product surveys again? Otherwise this task can be closed.
Hmmm - there is a CE Dept sprint on Thursday around defining core vs. strategic work.
Jan 12 2016
Thank you for this!
Jan 11 2016
Dec 22 2015
Dec 19 2015
Thank you, @mcruzWMF!
Dec 17 2015
Dec 15 2015
My user story:
As a manager, I would like to see my team's work in one board, so that I can keep a broad view on the tasks that my team is specifically either assigned to or considering as part of the workload.
I'm not going to make it to the Hackathon but would love to check in about the conversations had afterwards. Pinging @Wwes as we've discussed this as well. Will want to discuss in January. I suppose blocked tasks will accrue.
Moving towards finalization but generally seem to be supported at this point.
I will eventually get better at following up on these.
Dec 11 2015
Glad I found this. I had the same problem, it was bumming me out!
Dec 10 2015
Dec 9 2015
Hmmm - @Moushira, I'm not in OTRS and don;t have a clear idea of the systems, thought I have worked in support ticket queues. Is there a batch answering tool in OTRS so that multiple issues can be responded to and closed at the same time? Thinking on how to scale it.
Dec 8 2015
Dec 7 2015
Nov 25 2015
I was under the impression that we'd wait until January, as well. Gives the team all of December to ensure users are aware who have been following the issue. (it seems supported, but much of the conversation took place several months ago)
This is poorly defined. "Find a best way" of doing something is actionable, but on a more philosophical level. Will continue working on this overall problem, but I don't think this task embodies the problem we're actually trying to solve.
Thinking about personal goals, too? (perhaps too granular for MW)
Nov 24 2015
Nov 16 2015
Egads, I never responded to this.
Nov 11 2015
Nov 10 2015
Nov 4 2015
Nov 3 2015
We're not able to see when someone hasn't logged in in a long time, and I would say that's a more important factor. Seems a bit reasonable, yet uncertain, to remove the subscription if someone has not edited - but is it possible they're still being notified via email and/or possibly reading it that way?
Nov 2 2015
@Quiddity - you posted the updates to this, but not sure if you got all of them yet. Feel free to close this when you've done so!