A COMMUNITY proposal for COMMUNITY participation ANYbody

[woodsmoke]

Background:

a) I have many, many, many times advocated "community participation" projects at various fora. Anyone who knows a little of my history will verify this.

b) the problem is ..............how.

c) What IS it that "most" of "the community" does? With the distro?........... They USE it......

i) they can't "code", they can't "debug, any of that "geeky stuff".
ii) they CAN..............USE the applications and the distro.

d) So.....when the moderators call....IN VAIN........for "community participation"..... since they can't really DEFINE what "participation" might be...it falls flat.

e) Yes there are some people who can do "artwork" but not a lot... even FEWER can do something like make a sound file for the opening sound... etc.

MY PROPOSAL......

That THE PEOPLE OF THE COMMUNITY..............not me.....not woodsmoker............. the USERS..... who cannot "code" or "debug" or any of that stuff...

THE USERS.........

They.......... use my blog stories to do an "old time radio play".

HUH?

Actually it would be quite simple if there are two critical people available.....not the hero and villain!!

the two critical people are those who:

A) have the TIME....and DESIRE....to learn how to use a "mixer" like that provided in AV Linux or something..... to "mix" the voices.
B) somebody who can do some SMALL..........FREE........... music....as "background" music.... (actually this is NOT "necessary" but would greatly enhance the situation.

How to do it:

a) People read the blogs.
b) People volunteer to read for "a person".
c) Anonymously, they read into the sound recorder of their choice one or more indicated "lines" from one of the blogs and post them in some way convenient.
d) the voice clips are posted on the site and one or more polls are made wherein people can vote on "who sounds best" for various parts....all anonymous.
e) The "community picked" "voices" then "read" their "parts". (whether these would be "seperate clips" or a "continuous reading" or what I do not know....)
f) the "mixer person OR PERSONS.....then "mixes" the disparate voices into a "radio show".
g) the person who could make some music, or at least some sounds, like explosions or whatever would make them.
h) the mixer would then blend those sounds.

I MEAN ANYBODY CAN READ A PART.....no coding, no debuging, etc....just reading the part with "heartfelt attention and emotion".

Kubuntu would be the only forums that had a "sound" thing, to stop the casual passerby and attract attention.

And it would build "community" involvement!!

Probably the "critical" pathway part is the "mixer person".

I would, personally, if it would be a problem of bandwidth, etc. here , provide the money for increasing bandwidth or look into finding a place to host the audio files.

Anyway....people do NOT need to respond to this thread "visibly" if they do not so wish. They can PM me if desired. I promise to keep them anonymous.

And, if nobody volunteers, I will NOT hold it against the community, but I might throw it against the wall!

woodjustsuggestingsmoke

[woodsmoke]

From the left side of the front page.... a video editor for Kbuu, and others.....well if it can edit video it can also edit AUDIO!!

http://dot.kde.org/2012/03/20/kdenli...-not-just-pros

woodsmoke

[vw72]

I always thought that what was really needed is for somebody (or somebodies) to form a group to help the average user file meaningful bug reports. Sort of a community effort at bug reporting. Very often on launchpad, reports are flagged as not enough info because the user was inexperienced in what was really needed. Since the developers don't really have a time to hand hold new bug reporters, maybe the community could take that on.

Of course, the biggest way for most people to "contribute" is through evangelization of KDE and Kubuntu.

[GreyGeek]

.... Very often on launchpad, reports are flagged as not enough info because the user was inexperienced in what was really needed. ......

And, the usual request from launchpad is to supply a "stack trace" to the developer because these contain "debugger symbols" he can use. If the developer were doing his own debugging he'd just include the backtrace() function in his code. When I wrote Qt code I'd include

CONFIG += qt warn_off debug_and_release

in the *.pro file, which allowed the creation of two binaries, one with and one without debugging information. A "release" binary can be several MEGABYTES smaller than a "debug" binary.

A stack trace that contains much more information, such as the exact line number of the source file where things went wrong.

Just "how" does Joe or Sally Sixpack supply a useful crash report to the developer? That's what the application Apport is supposed to do, but often doesn't, especially if the apport bug report generator crashes . That problem plagued MY Kubuntu Precise installation until I clicked the option to shut off bug reporting.

But, if your Apport crash reporter is working OK, but when it tries to find useful information it can't, then perhaps you don't have it enabled. Do the following BEFORE running the app that has a reproducible crash:

[COLOR=#333333]sudo service apport start force_start=1[/COLOR]

and Apport will generate a stack trace.

To enable it permanently, do this:

• 
  

  sudo nano /etc/default/apport

... and change enabled from "0" to "1". HOWEVER, you probably DON'T want to do that because stack traces can contain personal information or even passwords. And, sometimes a crash is reported TOO MANY times, creating thousands of reports that the developer doesn't need. But, most users don't know that unless launchpad tells them to NOT report that particular bug any more.

IF you are really interested in generating crash reports to help developers and projects then consult Ubuntu's Wiki on Apport and how to use it.

[woodsmoke]

weell responding to vw72s thoughts.

How about, instead of doing a "radio show" we mebbe have a thread for "apport" posts so that the devs, who actually know what is going on, can say, this one has meaning and that one does not and then "somebody" files a "group" bug report at the appropriate place. It is still enhancing the sense of "community involvement".

just a thought.

woodsmoke

[ardvark71]

I apologise, but, in my opinion, you are mistaken. I can prove it. Write to me in PM.

Who's mistaken and why?

Regards...

[SteveRiley]

Who's mistaken and why?

Replying here for consistency... that account appeared to be some random postbot. I deleted it and its posts.

[ardvark71]

Replying here for consistency... that account appeared to be some random postbot.

I guess the bots are getting wise to the warped, nonsensical words and numbers that are almost impossible for the rest of us to figure out!

[SteveRiley]

I guess the bots are getting wise to the warped, nonsensical words and numbers that are almost impossible for the rest of us to figure out!

There's a human element. Bad guys hire humans to perform manual enrolling. Then when the bad guy collects enough new accounts, he deploys a bot to post spam or otherwise litter up the place.

[ardvark71]

From the article...

It's unclear if any laws are being broken by these CAPTCHA sweatshops. Savage says that there's nothing illegal about solving a CAPTCHA, even if what the solvers are doing supports fraudulent activity.

Honestly, I think it's past time for a comprehensive SPAM law that has real teeth and real consequences for those who engage in it. although a distinction will have to made for what is solicited or perhaps limited "legitimate advertising."

Regards...

[SteveRiley]

Once upon a time, it appeared that Washington State was about to benefit from just such legislation. But then big businesses threatened political death and we ended up with a much weaker set of regulations. How weak?

Washington's law makes it illegal in Washington to send an unsolicited commercial e-mail IF the e-mail is sent:
* To a Washington e-mail address; or
* From a computer located in Washington.

AND using:
* False information identifying the point of origin of the message or that hides the true origin of the sender (Also known as a "False Header");
* False or misleading information in the subject line; or
* A third party's e-mail address (domain name) without permission.

The law only applies when a sender knows or has reason to know the e-mail is being sent to Washington.

How does a sender find out if an e-mail address is located in Washington?
* The sender checks with the domain name registrant (usually the Internet Service Provider) before sending the e-mail;
* If the information is available, the sender is deemed to know the address is in Washington; or
* Even if the sender fails to inquire about the information, as long as it's available, the sender is deemed to know.

Basically -- toothless and useless.

[ardvark71]

Hi Steve...

Well, the first two lines were good.