User:Benjamin Linden/Office Hours/2008-09-11

From Second Life Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Transcript of Benjamin Linden's office hours:

[14:56] Jacek Antonelli: Hi Grant and Benjamin!
[14:56] Johan Yugen: Damn, was about to get a snapshot :P
[14:56] Jacek Antonelli: What an honor, Johan!
[14:56] Grant Linden: hello hello
[14:56] Benjamin Linden: hi guys!
[14:56] Kippie Friedkin: HI Grant, Hi Ben!
[14:57] Benjamin Linden: this must be the early crowd :-)
[14:57] Jacek Antonelli: hehe
[14:57] Kippie Friedkin: Pre-show
[14:57] Johan Yugen is on the European side of the Pond, so yeah ;)
[14:57] seat whispers: Have a seat
[14:58] Jacek Antonelli: Wanted to get a good seat, y'know
[14:58] Dusan Writer: I thought you'd have a podium and a laser poiner Jacek
[14:58] Grant Linden: this meeting does tend to fill up
[14:58] Dusan Writer: t
[14:58] Kippie Friedkin: Sure does. We've had a great crowd lately.
[14:59] Johan Yugen wonders what a poinert is...:D
[14:59] Jacek Antonelli: Pftt Johan. He obviously meant potiner
[14:59] Dusan Writer: my potiner was pointelss however so let's change the subject
[14:59] Jacek Antonelli: hehe
[15:00] Dusan Writer: i'd like to propose that like grant we can bring our own chairs to future meetings
[15:00] Kippie Friedkin: Hi Squirrel, Hi Pier!
[15:00] Grant Linden: hello Squirrel
[15:00] Geneko Nemeth: Heya Squirrel.
[15:00] Jacek Antonelli: Well, I'm not really presenting today. There's not really anything to present. No sexy pictures to show or anything. Just discussion :)
[15:00] Benjamin Linden: we probably need a bigger meeting space.
[15:00] Squirrel Wood: Yellow
[15:00] Grant Linden: no pictures!
[15:00] Squirrel Wood: Hippotropolis ^^
[15:00] Jacek Antonelli: I could show a funny picture of a kitten if you'd like, Grant
[15:01] Johan Yugen: Well the pictures would miss out search and economy, OF COURSE! ¬_¬
[15:01] Grant Linden: kittens are nice
[15:01] Dusan Writer: Kitten Bonsai is even better
[15:01] Grant Linden: heh
[15:01] Dusan Writer is a dog owner needless to say
[15:01] Kippie Friedkin: Alrighty...dinner has been inhaled..I'm ready to meet! :)
[15:02] Grant Linden: we should wait a few minutes to let your fans arrive
[15:02] Jacek Antonelli: Kitten bonsai disturbed me. It still does somewhat, even after learning it was fake
[15:02] Squirrel Wood: atm there is a cmake discussion going on at Hippotropolis so some fans may be late ^^
[15:02] Johan Yugen: "Community members", you mean? ;)
[15:02] Dusan Writer: the internet is FILLED with disturbances Jacek someone should regulate it and have an A/R reporting system
[15:02] Grant Linden: hello Charlette
[15:02] Charlette Proto: Hi everyone
[15:02] Squirrel Wood: http://www.cyriak.co.uk/lhc/lhc-webcams.html - Large Hadron Collider LIVE cams. Have a look how that thing works!
[15:02] Jacek Antonelli: I hope McCabe didn't doze off and forget about OH
[15:03] Grant Linden: hello Latransa
[15:03] Kippie Friedkin: lol....great link.
[15:03] Kippie Friedkin: That was floating around my office today.
[15:03] Latransa Pera: g'day Grant
[15:03] Latransa Pera: and all
[15:03] Grant Linden: Hello Tinker
[15:03] Jacek Antonelli: Heya all
[15:03] Grant Linden: Jacek Antonelli has announced a new, user-interface oriented project called Imprudence. She is our guest host and is here to lead a discussion on the Imprudence Project.
[15:03] Squirrel Wood: http://www.hasthelhcdestroyedtheearth.com/
[15:03] Johan Yugen: The click to reset thing ruins it :P
[15:03] Grant Linden: we are waiting for folks to arrive
[15:03] Tinker Toll: Hello all! Hey Grant
[15:03] Kippie Friedkin: and not to be forgotten...
[15:03] Kippie Friedkin: http://www.hasthelargehadroncolliderdestroyedtheworldyet.com/
[15:04] Jacek Antonelli: I keep checking every 15 minutes to see if it has yet
[15:04] Jacek Antonelli: *checks again* Phew.
[15:04] Pier Jaecies: ditto
[15:04] Latransa Pera: I hear the LHC is not longer the biggest threat to the stability of the universe :P
[15:04] Johan Yugen would be among the first 200 million to die, rather worryingly
[15:04] Kippie Friedkin: I wrote a thumbs up/thumbs down widget for it today. Thumbs up...all's good!
[15:04] Johan Yugen: 100 million*
[15:04] Jacek Antonelli: hehehe
[15:04] Kippie Friedkin: Hi Malbers!
[15:05] Jacek Antonelli: Heya Malbers, Aimee :)
[15:05] Kippie Friedkin: Hey Aimee!
[15:05] Squirrel Wood: Jacek, mine has a rss feed :p
[15:05] Aimee Trescothick: hi :)
[15:05] Malbers Linden: Hi All
[15:05] Jacek Antonelli: Ahoy Michael!
[15:05] Michael Cela: hey hey :)
[15:05] Charlette Proto: Kippie all I see is "NO" and "NOPE" am I missing something
[15:05] Grant Linden: hello Aimee
[15:05] Latransa Pera: This presentation is going to be all text, right?
[15:05] Jacek Antonelli: Yes, a text discussion
[15:05] Latransa Pera: kk
[15:05] Grant Linden: Text is easier to record
[15:06] Johan Yugen: I was about to say, if you're gonna get involved in voice I can't chat back :P
[15:06] Grant Linden: and we document all of the visits
[15:06] Dusan Writer: you do?????? OMG
[15:06] Grant Linden: shall we get started?
[15:06] Kippie Friedkin: lol
[15:06] Dusan Writer takes it all back
[15:06] Grant Linden: Our guest host today is Jacek Antonelli. She has announced a new, user-interface oriented project called Imprudence. Please tell us about the Imprudence Project.
[15:06] Charlette Proto: can you give us a link to our chat logs?
[15:06] Jacek Antonelli: If you haven't seen it yet, you could skim over our lovely manifesto: http://imprudenceviewer.org/manifesto/
[15:06] Charlette Proto: I was late last time
[15:07] Jacek Antonelli: But basically, the idea is to create an alternative viewer, one that we can experiment with and try weird new stuff without disturbing everyone else
[15:07] Benjamin Linden: squirrel that LHC link is awesome
[15:08] Benjamin Linden: sorry to interject Jacek
[15:08] Jacek Antonelli: Linden Lab has, unfortunately, had a tendency to be rather slow and cautious about making changes. Which makes sense, from a business perspective. But I'm interested in pushing the envelope.
[15:09] Jacek Antonelli: Specifically, I want to focus on improving the usability of the viewer. For the most part that's the UI, but also other issues like stability and the various tools that we use to do stuff
[15:10] Jacek Antonelli: By tools, I mean the things that let us do stuff, from IMing to shopping to building to taking snapshots
[15:11] Kippie Friedkin: Sweet.
[15:11] Charlette Proto: stability would have to be marginal issue at the moment, I don't remeber a crash of the viewer sine last update
[15:11] Jacek Antonelli: Unfortunately, not everyone is so lucky, Charlette :\
[15:11] Charlette Proto: graphic drivers have become more of a problem that is for sure
[15:12] Jacek Antonelli: I'm quite excited, because last night I received word from Nicholaz Beresford that we can use his stability and memory leak fixes in Imprudence. He even sent me some ones that he hadn't submitted to JIRA :)
[15:12] Dusan Writer: wonderful
[15:12] Benjamin Linden: that's excellent news
[15:12] Squirrel Wood: So if I understand all this correct, a good approach would be modularization and defined interfaces?
[15:13] Jacek Antonelli: We're also pulling in some of the cool patches from JIRA that, for one reason or another, haven't been applied to the official source
[15:13] Benjamin Linden: how is this going to work from a code management perspective? will you have a separate branch in LL's repository?
[15:13] Benjamin Linden: or will you be managing it elsewhere?
[15:13] Jacek Antonelli: I'll answer Squirrel's question, then about the code management
[15:13] Charlette Proto: memeory links? I'm able to run for 12 to 14 hours regularily, if not stopped by region restarts
[15:14] Jacek Antonelli: Modularization is a good way to go, especially since that would allow us to mix and match different UI elements to try new things quickly
[15:14] Charlette Proto: code management is an issue beyound design
[15:14] Dusan Writer applauds
[15:14] Squirrel Wood: Yep. You could quickly change to a different rendering engine or text processor or whatever
[15:14] Jacek Antonelli: We're also looking for designers to offer ideas on how to improve things. I don't have all the answers, and some of the ones I have are probably wrong, so I'm looking for lots of people to get involved
[15:15] Dusan Writer: is there any possible cross link to learning what they're doing with the openSim modularization approach?
[15:15] Orion Shamroy drools at the thought of a client side radar and built in spell checker... >:)
[15:15] Jacek Antonelli: So if we get some solid designs, we can focus on creating modular UI elements that implement those designs
[15:15] Jacek Antonelli: Okay, now to code management.
[15:16] Charlette Proto: Open Source spell checker is a problem like it is Open Office
[15:16] Jacek Antonelli: We've got our own repository set up online (there's a link from imprudenceviewer.org)
[15:16] Aimee Trescothick: (Client side radar is out there, in Dale Glass' viewer, might be worth looking into)
[15:16] Dusan Writer puts up hand to queue comment on UI design
[15:17] Jacek Antonelli: But one of the things we're trying is a distributed code management system, Git, that lets anyone create a copy of the repository on their own computer (or host it online), work on that without disturbing anyone else, and then offer the changes for other people to review
[15:17] Latransa Pera: will that be hierarchical, or flat?
[15:17] Charlette Proto: online that is the only way for codebase management
[15:18] Jacek Antonelli: That allows more flexibility than having a central repository, particularly since it means we don't have to grant write access for the main repository for everybody for them to contribute
[15:18] Jacek Antonelli: Latransa: the review process will be hierarchical, although right now the hierachy is pretty shallow :D
[15:19] Benjamin Linden: cool, thanks Jacek
[15:19] Jacek Antonelli: But it can scale out nicely, so that people can say "Hey, look what this person did"
[15:19] Jacek Antonelli: And it'll work its way up to the official repository, with each person trying it and testing it along the way
[15:19] Benjamin Linden: are you envisioning a grounds-up rewrite of the entire UI?
[15:19] Charlette Proto: how would you distribute it if it is to be based on local copies
[15:19] Jacek Antonelli: Let me get to Dusan's question that he raised his hand for, hehe
[15:20] Dusan Writer: i've volunteered some UI design talent from my end but one of the challenges is that the best way to do that is with use cases and usability data, of which we don't have any. I'd like to raise an eyebrow to the Lindens perhaps for comment on whether there's any data like that which might be useful to a project like this :)
[15:20] Squirrel Wood: I envision the ability to "link" inputs/outputs of diferent modules together... like, automate translation of text if such modules exist...
[15:20] Geneko Nemeth: Ooh pipes!
[15:20] Jacek Antonelli: Ah, indeed, Dusan. One thing that would be incredibly helpful to us is to have access to some data about what parts of the UI people find most challenging and frustrating
[15:21] Squirrel Wood: text input => preprocessor => translator => server pipe
[15:21] Latransa Pera: how far is the current viewer from being factored into functional vs. UI subsystems, relatively independent of each other?
[15:21] Jacek Antonelli: Obviously we're "asking around" and getting input from lots of people to generate some of our own data, and we'd like to try to do some formal user testing at some point
[15:21] Jacek Antonelli: But it would still be nice to have some more data *wink wink*
[15:21] Charlette Proto: I like the idea of modules in principle but defining appropriate module boundaries is always a problem
[15:21] Dusan Writer: i talked to a usability lab they're on board
[15:22] Jacek Antonelli: Sweet :D
[15:22] Chaos Mohr: Jacek, is this project planned to develop concurently all changes for all platforms with changes only being added to the official tree as they are completed for all platforms?
[15:22] Benjamin Linden: hmm Dusan, that's an interesting question about user research
[15:22] Jacek Antonelli: To quickly answer Benjamin's question from a little bit ago -- no, not a grounds-up rewrite. Not at first, anyway. We'll be starting with some incremental revisions and improvements, then perhaps rewrite some specific parts of it as we go
[15:23] Benjamin Linden: it might be tricky to share that data since we tell participants the sessions won't be publicly available
[15:23] Dusan Writer: even in aggregate form?
[15:23] Jacek Antonelli: Even a summary of your findings would be helpful
[15:23] Benjamin Linden: I do have survey data we could probably share
[15:24] Benjamin Linden: and perhaps roll-ups of the user observations that have been sanitized
[15:24] Orion Shamroy: Well, in all reality why not just do some sort of ad-hock usability studies? All it would take is a group and meetings such as this to query / survey inputs from the users...
[15:24] Dusan Writer: i'd be delighted to synch the research we were looking at with what you have as well Benjamin maybe we can discuss further
[15:24] Jacek Antonelli: Orion: we plan to do that as well. But the more data, the merrier :D
[15:24] Orion Shamroy: Jacek:: Got ya. :)
[15:24] Benjamin Linden: that would be great Dusan
[15:25] Jacek Antonelli: Chaos: we're planning to develop for all platforms concurrently. The difficulty there is finding people who we can rely on to compile the software on each platform
[15:25] Dusan Writer lets the coding talk that he doesnt understand continue
[15:25] Johan Yugen puts hand up for Linux if needed :p
[15:25] Johan Yugen: (compiling, that is)
[15:25] Jacek Antonelli: ^_^
[15:26] Jacek Antonelli: *scans the history* Oh. Latransa's question about UI vs functionality decoupling
[15:26] Jacek Antonelli: Unfortunately, the UI code currently extends its roots pretty deep, getting into places it shouldn't :\
[15:26] Jacek Antonelli: So we're likely going to have to do some trimming
[15:27] Jacek Antonelli: And refactoring
[15:27] Latransa Pera: ouch. that won't be very satisfying work, but probably quite important :-(
[15:27] Jacek Antonelli: Aye
[15:27] Jacek Antonelli: Any other questions so far?
[15:27] Charlette Proto: sounds like Y2K
[15:27] Malbers Linden: that refeactoring work would be interesting to feed back into LL (if possible)
[15:28] Malbers Linden: to understand the benefits/costs of the refactoring
[15:28] Dusan Writer: i'm confused about benjamins question about the connection to the LL code repository - how do you see this viewer feeding into the main viewer
[15:28] Malbers Linden: as you said, it may be needed to do other cool things
[15:28] Jacek Antonelli: Good question about feeding back into LL
[15:29] Latransa Pera: and vice versa -- when important new additions are made to the LL viewer (like the new touch functions), you'll be playing catchup
[15:29] Jacek Antonelli: One of the central ideas of Imprudence is that it can function idependently from LL. We don't have to wait for LL approval to implement something, which is how we can remain flexible.
[15:29] Malbers Linden: even just stories of refactoring; not necessarily the code itself
[15:29] Jacek Antonelli: But, that doesn't mean we can't submit our changes back to LL if they want to use it
[15:29] Jacek Antonelli: Aha, Malbers. I'll make a note of that
[15:30] Malbers Linden: sometimes it is even difficult to make Eng estimates without doing some work
[15:30] Jacek Antonelli: One thing I will have to do is carefully keep track of who has contributed code for a particular feature/fix/whatever, so that I can get their consent to submit back to LL
[15:30] Dusan Writer: which brings up the question of licenses i suppose and so on but that goes beyond me
[15:30] Charlette Proto: rather than catch up a replacement (major version) when new viewer is accepted may need far less work
[15:30] Latransa Pera: perhaps an opt-out policy would make more sense
[15:31] Jacek Antonelli: Good idea about opt-out. I'll have to consider that, and what sort of policy / agreement process we'll have
[15:31] Orion Shamroy: Once concern though... By separating your code base from LL's, couldnt that cause a bit of chaos with your viewer if they make some sort of radical change? Say for example whatever changes they may need to make to the client for that osgrid -> llgrid connectivity project?
[15:32] Jacek Antonelli: Regarding catchup to LL when they release new features: yeah, we'll be doing some of that. But in addition to Imprudence, I'm maintaining an archive of their code, so that we can apply the changes they make between each version to our own codebase, as needed
[15:32] Squirrel Wood: If done right, that would just add another module or replace one
[15:32] Orion Shamroy: Got it. :)
[15:32] Jacek Antonelli: I imagine there will come a time where there will be a big collision between LL's code and ours in terms of merging them, but we're prepared to spend the effort to sort that out when it comes up
[15:33] Charlette Proto: sonds like a heap of testing to me
[15:33] Jacek Antonelli: Also, since we're focusing on usability and the interface, most of the underlying code will be able to stay the same, or at least compatible
[15:33] Charlette Proto: need to move forward feast and constant merging would slow things down too much
[15:33] Jacek Antonelli: So if there's a change to the network protocol, for example, we can just drop in the changes LL has made
[15:33] Charlette Proto: nice
[15:34] Orion Shamroy: I see... Cool beans! :)
[15:34] Charlette Proto: two way merging - even better haha
[15:34] Jacek Antonelli: You're right Charlette, testing will slow things down. I'm still pondering exactly what sort of testing we'll do. At the very least, it will involve multiple people using the viewer for a while and making sure it still works :D
[15:34] Kippie Friedkin: As you've mentioned Quality Assurance can be pretty slow today. What are your plans for QA?
[15:34] Latransa Pera: so long as the forks haven't diverged too far
[15:35] Dusan Writer: i assume there will be no MAJOR fork in the road down the line like a substantial rewrite on Linden's side
[15:35] Charlette Proto: this will never be delivered if it is now and independent code stream
[15:35] Jacek Antonelli: Kippie: good question. The QA process I'm imagining is pretty much this --
[15:35] Charlette Proto: tree branches don't merge back and forth
[15:36] Charlette Proto: don't ever try what does not occur in nature
[15:36] Dusan Writer nods organically
[15:36] Charlette Proto: heard of heterarchies in objects?
[15:36] Jacek Antonelli: Someone makes a change. They try it out, and it seems to work, so they pass it to someone else. They try it too, and if it works, they'll pass it along. Eventually it will reach to me (the one maintaining the "official" codebase) and I'll do my own testing and apply it if it's good
[15:36] Charlette Proto: two way inheritance is a similar problem
[15:37] Kippie Friedkin: Cool. Maybe you will even get some QA volunteers who can test things for you.
[15:37] Jacek Antonelli: So, it would be a network of code-sharing and peer-review. That can expand outward nicely as the demand and need for testing grows
[15:37] Jacek Antonelli: I hope so, Kippie :D
[15:38] Latransa Pera: users will be knowingly taken on a risk in the interest of science, then -- versus the LL viewer. Nothing wrong with that.
[15:38] Benjamin Linden: Jacek, do you have any idea where you'll start?
[15:38] Benjamin Linden: in terms of making changes to the UI?
[15:38] Charlette Proto: like a roadmap?
[15:38] Johan Yugen: That's part of what is stopping the LL viewer progressing as quickly IMO - they *can't* break it without massive backlashes
[15:38] Jacek Antonelli: One of the things I've tried to stress about this project is that it's not just about programmers. We need people of all types. Programmers *and* designers *and* testers *and* users, among others
[15:38] Latransa Pera: Johan: and shouldn't.
[15:39] Jacek Antonelli: Benjamin: We've been looking at roadmaps lately, and we've got the first release planned out, and the second one in planning.
[15:39] Kippie Friedkin: Maybe some documentation people too.. I'd love to see a well-documented codebase out there! :)
[15:39] Charlette Proto: yes
[15:39] Jacek Antonelli: The first release will be applying lots of usability patches from JIRA. So that has miscellaneous changes across the board
[15:40] Aimee Trescothick: what motivated you to choose Git, when the leaning inside LL seems to be towards Mercurial in future?
[15:40] Orion Shamroy: Here's to that! :)
[15:40] Jacek Antonelli: The idea there is to use the first release to establish our testing and release process, and to sort out licensing and other administrative issues
[15:41] Aimee Trescothick: (kinda randomly out of order question, feel free to save it for later :D )
[15:41] Benjamin Linden: is the roadmap posted already Jacek?
[15:41] Charlette Proto: lets see it
[15:41] Charlette Proto: and who designed it?
[15:41] Jacek Antonelli: For the second release, we're going to try to tackle a significant usability issue or new feature. We're still taking ideas for this on the forum, but one of the most popular ideas has been an Align tool for building
[15:41] Jacek Antonelli: To align / snap / distribute prims automatically
[15:41] Charlette Proto: nice
[15:42] Charlette Proto: there is an align script out there, linking is more of an issue for me
[15:42] Jacek Antonelli: The roadmap isn't formally posted yet. I'm working on it, hehe. I'll be making a post on the blog this weekend about it
[15:42] Charlette Proto: the linking is a joke
[15:43] Charlette Proto: roadmap is core and where does conensus on issues accepted come from
[15:43] Jacek Antonelli: Aimee: I wasn't aware that LL was leaning towards Mercurial, actually. I'm familiar with Git and the benefits it offers over, say, Subversion. Mercurial vs Git is mostly a matter of taste.
[15:44] Aimee Trescothick nods I guessed it was that :)
[15:44] Latransa Pera: just to clarify for myself, is the ultimate goal to create a separate viable end-product viewer, or act as a proof-of-concept feeder for LL's main viewer?
[15:44] Jacek Antonelli: Mostly the first one, Latransa. I'd like to see us beat the pants off LL's viewer in the usability department ;)
[15:45] Latransa Pera: gotcha :-)
[15:45] Jacek Antonelli: But we also want to spur development across the board, and contributing back to LL can definitely be part of that
[15:45] Latransa Pera: needless to say, there's been some noise on that question in blog-land
[15:45] Dusan Writer: pfft blogs who needs em
[15:46] Kippie Friedkin: lol
[15:46] Latransa Pera: lol -- amen
[15:47] Dusan Writer: do contributors get feedback by squidogram or how do you communicate
[15:47] Charlette Proto: how about conting how many steps in UI times how many times wxplained to users by mentors for an indicator of what should be made more accessibele
[15:47] Benjamin Linden: I had a thought about gathering user data on your own: how about talking to the volunteers and mentors?
[15:47] Jacek Antonelli: Charlette: When it comes down to it, I'm the director (at least for the official Imprudence viewer; someone else could make their own fork if they wish). So, while I do gather and respect the input from everyone, and a consensus among many people is quite persuasive, it comes down to that -- convincing me that a particular change will offer significant benefit
[15:48] Benjamin Linden: Jacek the design nazi :-)
[15:48] Charlette Proto: some of the basic everyday things require an extraordinary number os steps now
[15:48] Jacek Antonelli: Indeed >:D muahaha ;)
[15:48] Kippie Friedkin: no UI for you!
[15:48] Benjamin Linden: so the question I've been dying to ask Jacek
[15:48] Charlette Proto: what will the forum for consensus be then
[15:49] Charlette Proto: we never agree or vote on anything here
[15:49] Benjamin Linden: is one of the goals of Imprudence to undo the communicate window?
[15:49] Benjamin Linden: :-)
[15:49] Jacek Antonelli: We have discussions on the forum, as well as a mailing list (which is somewhat less used). A decision is reached by discussing the topic until I'm convinced one way or another ;D
[15:50] Charlette Proto: OK then I'm out I suppose
[15:50] Charlette Proto: sorry Jacek
[15:50] Jacek Antonelli: We might do that, Ben. I really hadn't thought about that.
[15:50] Latransa Pera shrugs ... once you rotated the contacts window 90degrees and peel off the chat window, it isn't so bad :D
[15:51] Jacek Antonelli: Dazzle, though. Dazzle is out. ... j/k ;) Actually, cosmetics is not our focus, except where the cosmetics detract significantly from usability
[15:51] Latransa Pera: Charlette, you prefer a pure peer consensus approach to a hierarchical scheme for change decisions?
[15:51] Malbers Linden: Jacek and McCabe established this -- there is no reason it has to be a democracy
[15:51] Benjamin Linden: lol actually I was going to ask about the skin
[15:51] Benjamin Linden: you should definitely explore different visual styles
[15:52] Benjamin Linden: maybe have a skin contest
[15:52] Jacek Antonelli: I imagine we'll be making our own skin(s) eventually, yeah. We'll leave Dazzle around for posterity. (And so we "never forget" ;D)
[15:52] Charlette Proto: convincing someone is a battle, voting has a greater appeal to me personally
[15:52] Orion Shamroy: *or allow others to make their own skins - ala firefox?
[15:52] Benjamin Linden: most folks tend to agree "design by committee" doesn't work too well
[15:52] Aimee Trescothick: depends how open minded the person you're trying to convince is
[15:53] Charlette Proto: visuals are irrelevant, the number of clicks to work the thing shoud be the guide and measure
[15:53] Charlette Proto: well Aimee, tell me more
[15:53] Aimee Trescothick: few commercial products use democracy for development
[15:53] Latransa Pera: it's too easy to vote yourself bread and circuses when you're not the baker or the acrobat :-)
[15:53] Jacek Antonelli: Charlette: I like to think that I'm fairly open minded. If a lot of people who have a reputation for clear thinking are opposed to something, I'm almost certainly going to give it strong consideration
[15:54] Jacek Antonelli: consideration against it, I mean
[15:54] Charlette Proto: I;ll wait to see it
[15:55] Charlette Proto: sorry again, had some sad experiences here
[15:55] Jacek Antonelli: But yeah. Design by committee has its pits. And endless discussion accomplishes nothing. So I may have to put my foot down on something eventually.
[15:55] Dusan Writer: strikes me thats the perfect perspective charlette, it keeps jacek honest
[15:56] Charlette Proto: 'designed by commite' is a joke sure
[15:56] Dusan Writer: its a consensus approach unless its not
[15:56] Dusan Writer: haha
[15:56] Charlette Proto: but voting is usually used in situations like that
[15:56] Latransa Pera: straw voting ,at the least, yes
[15:57] Jacek Antonelli: Phew, the hour flew by
[15:57] Grant Linden: before people begin to fade away at the top of the hour I want to thank Jacek Antonelli, we look forward to getting updates on your project as it evolves.
[15:57] Dusan Writer: just give me a free t-shirt and i'm in
[15:57] Charlette Proto: well active branches are a good measure of important issues
[15:57] Malbers Linden: it will be very interesting and exciting to see how things evolve
[15:57] Latransa Pera: this doesn't sound all that sinister, actually :P
[15:57] Dusan Writer can't actually DO anything but wants a t-shirt
[15:58] Jacek Antonelli: I want to plug http://imprudenceviewer.org/ again. I'll be posting updates there, and we also have lovely forums where I post threads to gather input on various topics
[15:58] Grant Linden: Next week Elidor Paslong will present his online social networking widget, Spider. http://spider.secondplaces.net
[15:58] Jacek Antonelli: Right now the big topic is what our major feature/fix should be for version 2. So go offer your insights :D
[15:58] Grant Linden: Thank you Jacek
[15:58] Charlette Proto: how about a blog with issue related hirearchical threads to kick off the site
[15:58] Malbers Linden: thanks Jacek
[15:59] Dusan Writer: thanks grant, benjamin and malbers for hosting
[15:59] Latransa Pera: tyvm Ms Antonelli, and the Lindens too
[15:59] Kippie Friedkin: Thanks Jacek...this is a very exciting project!
[15:59] Jacek Antonelli: Yes, thanks for the opportunity to talk about it today :)
[15:59] Dusan Writer: benjamin can i go off-line with you about the usability data at some point?
[15:59] Malbers Linden: (Grant is doing the heavy lifting on our side)
[15:59] Tinker Toll: thanks a lot, very interesting
[15:59] Benjamin Linden: Dusan, email would be best for that
[15:59] Dusan Writer: will do thanks
[15:59] Grant Linden: Thank you for coming everyone! We appreciate your hard work and interest in making Second Life better
[15:59] Benjamin Linden: thanks Dusan
[16:00] Charlette Proto: [15:58] You: how about a blog with issue related hirearchical threads to kick off the site - lost in all the name dropping
[16:00] Benjamin Linden: thanks for being a willing participant in our interrogation Jacek :-)
[16:00] Jacek Antonelli: hehe, my pleasure
[16:00] Aimee Trescothick: lol
[16:00] Jacek Antonelli: Charlette: can you elaborate on what you mean? I'm not sure I understand
[16:01] Benjamin Linden: take care all!
[16:01] Charlette Proto: raise issues for development by allowing us to blog
[16:01] Grant Linden: thanks again!