[osol-mktg] Community Consolidation -- Marketing & UGs

[Jim Grisanzio]

Stephen Hahn wrote On 04/06/07 11:43,:
> * Jim Grisanzio <Jim.Grisanzio at sun.com> [2007-04-05 16:13]:
> 
>>If we don't put them in a meta-community, though, then we don't really
>>have a place for them under the current site structure. I know that
>>people want a wiki feature on the site and that's being specified
>>right now, so maybe individual UGs can take a wiki page someplace and
>>we can remove the UG community altogether. That's certainly an option
>>as well. But I agree: the current set up can't scale at all.
> 
> 
>   *cough* Projects *cough*
> 
>   My name suggestion (really Simon's from a year ago or so):  Advocates.
> 
>   - Stephen



Oh, cool, I like that. Ok. :) I'm an idiot.

And we can do that right now without any merger or need to propose new 
site changes, and it solves the immediate structural problem with the UG 
community. UGs can still have their own spaces/lists and still 
communicate across groups via ug-discuss. Each existing user group 
becomes a project, and new user groups can go through the same project 
proposal process currently in place.

I like Advocates, too. We now have three possible names: Advocates, 
Evangelism, Outreach. I see little consensus for a merger, but if we can 
solve the structural problem with the UG community that would go a long 
way to making that community more effective.

I say we do it. Other comments?

Jim