UCISA WLF / UKOLN Workshop: Beyond Email - Transcript of the ucisa-ukoln-wlf-social room
Transcript of discussion prior to workshop
Conversation with ucisa-ukoln-wlf-social@private.jabber.org at 2004-11-21 01:54:42 on et207@jabber.org/Gaim (jabber)
(02:22:32) : Em Tonkin, UKOLN has set the topic to: Social chatter
(18:30:36) Shaun_A [shaun_a@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(18:31:22) Shaun_A: Hi Just testing ;)
(18:57:02) jimkerslake [jimkerslake@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(18:58:40) jimkerslake: Hello...!
(19:00:19) Shaun_A: Hi how are you?
(19:00:49) Shaun_A: Just cam back into (home) room physically :)
(19:01:07) Shaun_A: oopz came I meant
(19:01:40) Shaun_A: c u all tomorrow bye
(19:01:43) Shaun_A left the room.
(19:03:09) jimkerslake: Yep, see you in Leeds - jim
(19:03:47) jimkerslake left the room (Logged out).
(19:04:02) jimkerslake [jimkerslake@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(19:06:09) jimkerslake left the room.
(19:06:13) jimkerslake [jimkerslake@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(19:08:00) jimkerslake: 1234
(19:09:31) jimkerslake: test
(19:10:11) jimkerslake left the room.
(19:12:10) jimkerslake [jimkerslake@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(19:12:21) jimkerslake left the room.
(21:17:21) Owen [owen@jabber.org/Adium@jabber.org/Adium] entered the room.
(21:17:58) Owen: Just testing
(22:06:50) Owen left the room (Replaced by new connection).
Transcript of discussion on day of workshop
(09:05:23) lisbk [lisbk@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(09:06:06) lisbk left the room.
(09:06:29) lisbk [lisbk@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(09:06:47) lisbk left the room (Logged out).
(09:37:40) pda_intcon [pda_intcon@jabber.org/Adium] entered the room.
(09:37:59) pda_intcon: Hello Leeds - anyone around this morning?
(10:10:16) Alison Pope [alisonpope@jabber.org/Adium] entered the room.
(10:10:20) em_tonkin [em_tonkin@jwchat.org/jwchat] entered the room.
(10:10:29) em_tonkin: We are here!
(10:10:51) pda_intcon: Hi and Good morning everyone
(10:11:39) Alison Pope left the room.
(10:12:07) AlisonPope [alisonpope@jabber.org/Adium] entered the room.
(10:13:53) AlisonPope left the room.
(10:14:32) Alison Pope (UCISA) [alisonpope@jabber.org/Adium] entered the room.
(10:15:29) em_tonkin: Remind me again what the rooms in use today are:
(10:15:49) em_tonkin: ucisa-ukoln-wlf-social, ucisa-ukoln-wlf-tech, and a third one?
(10:17:46) em_tonkin: ah... ucisa-ukoln-wlf-chat
(10:44:50) pda_intcon: This is for social chat?
(10:46:44) em_tonkin: this was intended for social chat, I think
(10:46:59) em_tonkin: but given that there are four of us, and two of us are me,
I think it's fairly academic at this point
(10:53:33) Alison Pope (UCISA): Just posted a Wikialong entry at the same time as
someone else and lost my edit. As there was no option to go back had
to redo it. That was quite annoying...
(10:58:58) em_tonkin: Yes...
(10:59:07) em_tonkin: I just had exactly the same problem :-(
(11:04:37) em_tonkin: it needs a 'page already being edited' warning
(11:07:14) Alison Pope (UCISA): some sort of auto-refresh for use in these sort
of scenarios would also be useful. obviously unlike here the discussion
in wkialong remains static unless you remeber to refresh the page before
you make an edit.
(11:08:31) em_tonkin: many wikis have a more user-friendly solution than this one...
we'll have to write a note to the author :-)
(11:43:13) pda_intcon left the room (Logged out).
(12:34:06) Rosemary.Russell [rosemary.russell@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(12:34:10) greg.tourte [greg.tourte@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(12:34:52) Alison Pope (UCISA) left the room (Logged out).
(12:34:57) greg.tourte: I welcome rosemary
(12:35:03) em_tonkin: hello!
(12:35:27) Rosemary.Russell: hi everyone
(12:37:20) Rosemary.Russell: It's just taken most of the am to get here...
(12:37:34) em_tonkin: To be honest we've all found it quite difficult to use
(12:37:47) em_tonkin: brian inadvertently published the wrong jabber rooms
(12:38:04) greg.tourte: hey hey:-)
(12:38:38) em_tonkin: can someone invite owen@jabber.org to ucisa-ukoln-wlf-social please?
(12:38:48) owen [owen@jabber.org/Adium] entered the room.
(12:38:59) owen: I'm in!
(12:40:34) em_tonkin: We're about to wander off for a little lunch, and be back in a few...
(12:40:47) Rosemary.Russell: Well, I'm glad it wasn't just me that had probs -
had to download the gaim software twice and register twice...
(12:47:15) Rosemary.Russell left the room.
(13:26:46) Lawrie [Lawrie@jwchat.org/jwchat] entered the room.
(13:26:56) em_tonkin: There we are.
(13:27:42) pshab [pshab@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(13:28:00) em_tonkin: Welcome to the jabber chatrooms :-)
(13:28:20) owen: where are the materials for this talk then?
(13:29:15) em_tonkin: That's a very good question...
(13:32:15) em_tonkin: Interesting, though - I never really thought of slashdot as a blog
(13:32:58) owen: Perhaps comes down to definitions - it is like trying to define
what a 'journal' (in a personal journal sense) is
(13:33:14) pshab: are there also the -tech and -content rooms?
(13:33:23) em_tonkin: yes...
(13:33:28) em_tonkin: err.. no
(13:33:32) em_tonkin: -tech and -chat
(13:33:50) owen: Isn't a weblog just an easy to use web content management/publication system?
(13:34:03) em_tonkin: -chat was supposed to be for discussing the actual content
of the workshop, and social was for talking about beer :-)
(13:34:33) owen: OK - had a really nice pint of Smiles in Bristol on Saturday :)
(13:34:48) em_tonkin: I suppose the issue with sites like slashdot and kuro5hin
for me was that it is so difficult to get entries published
(13:34:54) em_tonkin: unless you count slashdot journals
(13:35:12) owen: is anything happening in 'chat'? I can't get into that one
(13:35:20) owen: unless someone invites me
(13:35:49) em_tonkin: slashdot has a sort of authoritarian editorial board and
kuro5hin has a democratic voting system
(13:36:29) em_tonkin: oh... sorry
(13:36:30) em_tonkin: hang on
(13:37:02) em_tonkin: there's nothing much happening in it though
(13:37:18) em_tonkin: I think with the number of people we have online, we might
as well concentrate on just the one room
(13:37:49) owen: anyone know of any blog software with ldap authentication?
(13:37:53) Lawrie: I've left the other rooms and just remaianed in ths one
(13:38:59) owen: but how many of the blogs are active?
(13:39:06) owen: I know I don't post to mine too often
(13:39:30) Lawrie: why are these stats important anyway (in our context)?
(13:39:34) em_tonkin: possibly movabletype has ldap?
(13:40:02) em_tonkin: well... I post frequently to two blogs, but neither are work-related.
(13:40:35) em_tonkin: one of them is a 'rant outlet' and the other one is just
an exercise in practicing foreign languages.
(13:41:19) owen: ok - so not only do we have the question of how many of the blogs
technorati track are 'live' but how many individuals it represents -
I have 2 personal blogs, as well as a work related one (for a specific
project, no longer updated)
(13:41:34) em_tonkin: at this moment we're trying to decide how to reintroduce
blogging software to UKOLN, and one of our big problems is that as
soon as it becomes a duty, inspiration disappears
(13:41:54) Lawrie: But wht do you want to use the blog?
(13:42:13) owen: because of what derek just said - easy to use, content management
(13:42:18) em_tonkin: what, within UKOLN?
(13:42:23) Lawrie: Yes
(13:42:24) em_tonkin: internal communication, I suppose.
(13:42:34) em_tonkin: I'm just as happy with a wiki plus an RSS feed
(13:42:46) Lawrie: but you#re also using chat?
(13:43:03) em_tonkin: yes, for various things
(13:43:07) owen: today? or generally?
(13:43:19) Lawrie: so is a trackback and share back a Blog?
(13:44:29) em_tonkin: interestingly, livejournal doesn't have trackbacks...
(13:44:33) owen: not sure what you mean by this. Trackback is a way of cross-referencing
between blogs (I think!)
(13:44:35) em_tonkin: so I assume some of these are optional.
(13:45:50) em_tonkin: though some say that LJ is better defined as a journal than a blog.
(13:46:25) owen: i've not found trackbacks particularly useful in my own blog use
- although my blog software does support it
(13:46:58) em_tonkin: I find them positively creepy
(13:48:07) em_tonkin: the effect, that linking to another person's blog causes
them to link to your own, can be undesirable.
(13:49:24) em_tonkin: It makes it difficult to talk 'behind someone's back' online
- to do so requires a URL redirect service...
(13:49:39) owen: just picking up on the issue of blogs and chat that Lawrie mentioned
(using one/both) - the 'comment' facility on blogs is really useful,
but in some cases you just want to break out of the limitations of
asynchronous commenting, and have a proper discussion - perhaps this
is where the two could overlap effectivley
(13:50:00) em_tonkin: that's a good point
(13:50:10) owen: googledeskbar knows what is in my inbox!
(13:50:35) em_tonkin: would one want to preserve the synchronous discussion in the blog?
(13:51:05) Lawrie: How does this fit in with the VRE this morning?
(13:51:37) owen: The problem with this is that transcripts aren't always effective
as a way of getting the information across - much better to have a
summary written for the blog after (perhaps with the transcript archived
somewhere)
(13:52:28) em_tonkin: It would require a bit more work to add a summary...
(13:52:35) owen: of course!
(13:52:44) em_tonkin: but I agree anyway
(13:52:45) Lawrie: Also he's already talked about Blog Plagerism - why put your
'early' research up for review? Someone will nick it
(13:53:06) em_tonkin: well
(13:53:27) owen: Depends on how we see people gettting credit for publication
(13:53:30) em_tonkin: Perhaps that depends on the blog audience and profile
(13:53:55) owen: in the current system, we emphasise publication in peer review journals
(13:54:21) owen: if we assign more credit for early publication, then there is
motivation to publish early and often
(13:54:33) owen: not sure how this would work in reality
(13:54:39) em_tonkin: I do feel that there is benefit in publishing online
(13:54:54) em_tonkin: partially because it encourages a larger shared vocabulary
(13:55:01) Lawrie: but we never publish until we are confident that we have the IPR,
the publication itself (inspite of Peer Review) establishes ownership
(13:55:22) owen: but people publish 'pre-prints'?
(13:55:33) owen: how do you maintain ipr with these?
(13:55:38) em_tonkin: post-acceptance, generally?
(13:55:48) Lawrie: with a blog used as a peer review it appears from this presentation
that IP theft is easier?
(13:56:15) owen: not sure I believe this is about the medium as such
(13:56:58) em_tonkin: I suspect IP theft has a lot to do with assumptions
(13:57:00) em_tonkin: eg. that nobody is likely to notice.
(13:57:01) owen: I can as easily cut and paste from pdf as I can from html
(13:57:02) Lawrie: :-D
(13:57:24) em_tonkin: It happens with journals (one friend of mine, a researcher,
once peer-reviewed a paper that turned out to be a direct but somewhat
misspelt copy of an old paper of his own)
(13:57:54) em_tonkin: in his case he is in a fairly cosy field of thermodynamics,
so it was obvious to everybody
(13:58:33) owen: is there anything wrong with trivia?
(13:59:00) em_tonkin: I think a little discussion of memetics would be an interesting
addition to this...
(13:59:18) em_tonkin: travelling funny ideas with appealing hooks
(13:59:45) owen: definitely see some of this happening in blogs within a small community
(e.g. library science blogs)
(14:13:21) owen: anyone got a definition of a wiki to hand?
(14:16:48) Lawrie: wikipedia?
(14:17:12) em_tonkin: ah...
(14:17:38) Lawrie: A wiki enables documents to be written collectively in a simple
markup language using a web browser. A single page in a wiki is referred
to as a "wiki page," while the entire body of pages, which are usually
highly interconnected via hyperlinks, is called "the wiki." A defining
characteristic of wiki technology is the ease with which pages can be
created and updated. Generally, there is no review before modifications
are accepted, and most wikis are open to the general public - or at
least anyone who has access to the wiki server. In fact, even registration
of a user account is not always required.
(14:17:55) Lawrie: from wikipedia
(14:18:28) Lawrie: I'm in blogs and at one point I almost had a handle on it
(14:18:50) em_tonkin: characteristics are: collaboratively editable web site, with
a simple markup language (like *for bold text* and so on), and with versioning
(14:18:54) owen: yes - we seem to be having problems agreeing exactly whether it
constitutes discussion or publication - I guess this is exactly where
the wiki invents a grey area
(14:19:12) em_tonkin: yes...
(14:19:24) em_tonkin: I use the wiki as discussion, and the dump-to-PDF as publication
(14:19:46) em_tonkin: or indeed dump-site-to-HTML, which is also available on some wikis
(14:20:05) owen: aren't wikis html already?
(14:20:21) em_tonkin: yes, but generated HTML
(14:20:29) em_tonkin: eg they are coded in PHP or Perl or whatever...
(14:20:40) em_tonkin: and they dynamically generate the HTML page that you see
(14:21:54) em_tonkin: static html pages generated by a wiki are just a web site
and no longer editable as a wiki
(14:25:57) Lawrie left the room (Disconnected).
(14:25:57) em_tonkin left the room (Disconnected).
(14:34:46) em_tonkin [em_tonkin@jwchat.org/jwchat] entered the room.
(14:36:21) owen: i thought the initial idea behind a wiki was that you could easily
hyperlink documents using CamelCase?
(14:36:44) em_tonkin: true
(14:36:55) owen: when did it become somekind of democratic publishing method?
(14:37:20) em_tonkin: Don't ask me: but it is useful as one
(14:37:46) em_tonkin: CamelCase has rather gone out of fashion, by the way
(14:37:54) em_tonkin: I think mediawiki started the trend
(14:38:05) em_tonkin: (mediawiki being the wiki behind wikipedia)
(14:38:38) em_tonkin: it isn't very natural to read, so some wikis use alternative
ways of defining hyperlinks such as double square brackets [[ ]]
(14:39:45) greg.tourte left the room.
(14:40:18) em_tonkin: Right... that's it from me for today - until next time!
(14:40:35) owen: ok - good to chat - thanks for the help getting in
(14:40:46) em_tonkin: cheers
(14:40:49) em_tonkin left the room.
(14:42:04) owen left the room (Replaced by new connection).
(14:46:05) kwansuree [kwansuree@jabber.org.uk/Gaim] entered the room.
(14:55:01) pshab left the room.
(14:55:37) lisbk [lisbk@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(15:08:08) lisbk left the room (Disconnected).
(15:12:25) kwansuree left the room.
(21:55:55) lisbk [lisbk@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(22:00:59) lisbk left the room.
Transcript of discussion on day after workshop
(10:58:07) lisbk [lisbk@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(11:36:18) : Em Tonkin, UKOLN has set the topic to: Social chatter: this room will
remain open for the week
(12:10:31) owen [owen@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(12:47:14) lisbk: Hi Owen
(12:50:23) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: Hello
(12:52:23) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: I'm trying to write something about memetics and blogs
(12:53:52) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: But in the meantime I have made the rather terrifying
discovery that Susan Blackmore has given up her post at UWE and dyed
her hair pinker and greener than ever before.
(12:54:01) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: That's what academia does to one.
(13:10:04) lisbk: Hi Emma, neither Own nor myself can find the conent room (other 2 are OK)
(13:57:50) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: The which room?
(13:58:02) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: content?
(13:58:17) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: well, I'm afraid that's because you originally asked
it to be called ucisa-ukoln-wlf-chat.
(13:58:46) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: and then it went through a brief period of being called -discuss
(13:58:59) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: but it never was called -content.
(13:59:22) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: I was discussing this yesterday with the #mplayer guys, though.
(13:59:42) owen: whats it called at the moment?
(13:59:46) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: as they (the mplayer community) are one of the few
IRC groups to have succeeded in running more than one simultaneous channel.
(13:59:52) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: ucisa-ukoln-wlf-chat.
(14:00:24) owen: ok - I'm in
(14:00:30) owen: thanks
(14:00:48) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: The mplayer chaps tell me that the solution to running
multiple simultaneous chatrooms is 1) to have several conspicuously
separate discussions, and 2) to have a large pool of people prepared to chat.
(14:01:05) owen: I can see that only a large no of people would work
(14:01:30) owen: perhaps unless conversation starts going off in 2 directions even
within the chat room
(14:01:48) owen: This happened in here yesterday, with overlapping conversations
(14:02:10) owen: We never really got back to Lawrie on the whole VRE thing, because
we had gone to a different topic
(14:02:33) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: this unfortunately is a feature of text based chat in general
(14:02:53) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: it is lacking in the sort of physical cues that one
uses to direct face to face conversation
(14:02:55) owen: Perhaps it would be handy to be able to split off discussion as
necessary - on the fly? A bit like is possible in bulletin board s/w
(14:03:23) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: so it is hard to complete one's discussion of point A
and then look pointedly at the author of point B in such a way as to say
"Let's return to Lawrie's point".
(14:03:31) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: It might be useful...
(14:03:48) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: I think maybe the difficulty would just be that it
would be hard to split off and to return
(14:03:55) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: so the conversation would likely devolve to pairs
(14:04:13) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: I do remember a research project from some chaps at
MIT or somewhere in which they had a sort of party metaphor.
(14:04:31) owen: Not sure - it would be true in a small group, but I think in a
larger group it would work
(14:04:39) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: you moved closer to the group whose topic you were
interested in, and 'heard' their conversation more loudly.
(14:04:42) owen: of course - everyone would end up in the kitchen
(14:04:45) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: hehe
(14:04:47) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: right :-)
(14:05:26) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: My usual experience is that people tend to join as and
when to private chat or temporary chatrooms
(14:06:19) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: when they are experienced with the interface
(14:07:05) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: but mainly long-term chatrooms tend to be long periods
of silence with brief periods of chat, so it is perhaps a different
situation to the conference chat from yesterday
(14:07:21) owen: i'm not very familiar with using IM - I've never really found it so useful
(14:07:29) owen: however, I could see the potential yesterday
(14:09:37) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: New technologies tend to be answers looking for a problem
(14:10:07) owen: is there a 'homepage' for the wiki? I can see the comments using
wikalong, but wasn't sure if I could just browse the content
(14:10:43) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: That's a good question - Brian?
(14:10:46) owen: thought it would be useful to have some kind of homepage for the
conference that makes it easier to navigate all of the available material
presented and created yesterday
(14:13:21) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: I'll forward that one to Brian
(14:17:19) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: (the homepage being his creation)
(14:20:16) owen: i'd also suggest the circulation of the details of these chat
rooms to the attendees again, as well as perhaps a reminder that people
are still updating the wiki
(14:24:29) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: Yes, I'm going to suggest a few meeting times later on in the week
(14:27:19) lisbk: Hi Own, Emma (Strange I didn't get an alert for this discussion)
(14:28:14) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: Hello :-)
(14:28:47) lisbk: I'm currently working on this :-). Go to the home page and you'll
see links to i) your Blog and ii) the Wiki comments. I'm currently
keeping a local copy of the Wikis in case the content gets deleted -
see http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/web-focus/events/workshops/ucisa-wlf-2004-11/wiki-test/transcript.php
as example
(14:28:50) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: as if by magic I just noticed that the wiki notes
for the discussion talks and groups are now up on the UKOLN workshop
page, by the way.
(14:28:53) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: oh.
(14:28:55) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: :-)
(14:29:24) lisbk: BTW, Em, I assume you'll be able to get the transcripts of the
chat rooms at some stage
(14:29:34) lisbk: Own, is this what you meant?
(14:29:47) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: oh yes, the transcripts.
(14:29:53) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: I knew I was half way through something.
(14:31:15) lisbk: BTW Own, I notice that you'd Wikid a page that I hadn't intended
to be annotated (the general discussion group page). This meat there
originally wasn't a referer field to the page so the comments were not
easy to find for non Wikalong users. Now sorted, but an interesting
thing for me to consider
(14:31:52) lisbk: I'll email delegates once I've sorted out the links
(14:31:54) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: Meta-discussion is a hard thing to regulate
(14:32:32) lisbk: yes - and this discussion shouldn't be in the social room!
(14:33:09) lisbk: BTW having a techie room and a content room would have made more
sense if the content was medieval history. For us, the two topics are the same.
(14:33:30) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: Well, yes. I personally would have gone for just one room.
(14:33:54) owen: i did deliberately post to the general discussion group page,
because i was commenting on a theme I felt had come out of more than
one discussion
(14:34:16) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: It is my experience that outside major communities
with say five hundred or more members, discussion generally requires
only one thread (and when it requires more it branches out rather naturally)
(14:35:51) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: a group chatting on several topics tends to use
conversational methods like prefixing comments with the intended recipient:
(14:35:52) owen: i'd agree one room would have done yesterday (and for now).
A troubleshooting room has some potential - but as Alison pointed out,
those with tech problems couldn't get in the chat anyway
(14:36:02) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: most IRC clients actually have the tab key shortcutted
to list the last names in order that spoke on the chatroom...
(14:36:51) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: of course, I'm not saying that it's per se bad to
have three rooms. Simply that people get discouraged quicker with three
almost empty rooms than with one fairly active room, that people find
it difficult to be in three rooms at the same time and follow the various threads.
(14:37:51) lisbk: I agree with your comments - although I personally prefer to
apply more structure to such things
(14:37:55) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: next time we try this I think we might just go for
an IRC based solution, which is a little bit simpler for the user
(14:38:00) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: hmm...
(14:38:07) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: I agree that structure is a good thing in general
(14:38:15) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: but it is a task analysis problem, in a sense
(14:38:40) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: as with many applications of technology, the real
problem is to be able to predict the properties of the system emergent
from the addition of that technology :-)
(14:39:06) owen: i think it's clear that yesterday we didn't have enough people
to warrant more than one chat
(14:39:39) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: yes
(14:39:54) owen: it also suggests that in a 'busier' environment we would have
needed moderators to make sure chat was happening in the right place
(14:39:54) lisbk: We were expecting over 30 networked users - in a way I felt that
we might have had to use more groups with smaller numbers (e.g. regiponal
chat rooms)
(14:40:35) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: Hopefully as people get used to the technology (and as
we make it more accessible) this might begin to occur.
(14:40:42) owen: so - was it accessing the chat rooms that was the problem, or was
it that people felt unable to take part?
(14:40:50) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: access, in my experience.
(14:41:17) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: about six people told me they'd been unable to use the system
(14:41:26) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: unsurprisingly, given the various obstacles.
(14:42:00) owen: how many people tried accessing the groups before the day?
(14:42:01) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: but presumably the exit questionnaires might tell us
at which point people gave up.
(14:42:45) lisbk: The one's who met up on Thurs/Fri (Lawrie Phipp,s Jon W., ...) seemed to be OK
(14:43:18) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: The people on the day were working from the saturday paper
(14:45:24) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: They therefore could not find the room.
(14:46:48) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: At least, those who asked me all had this problem,
plus maybe one other, like being unable to log in or inadvertently
putting spaces in their jabber username and getting errors.
(14:48:07) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: Incidentally, Brian, certain of the wiki notes have
unusable links due to extra brackets or similar punctuation.
(14:48:18) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: eg. (http://www.duke.edu.ipod).
(14:48:38) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: on http://wikalong.phunnel.org/kwiki/index.cgi?679254aea167661f8bc3043f3fbf4186
(the Mobile Devices discussion group)
(14:51:57) lisbk: OK. I'll fix errors and improve layout (e.g. dividers between
people's comments) but leave content, spelling, etc.)
(14:57:52) owen: should be www.duke.edu/ipod anyway
(15:19:04) pshab [pshab@jabber.org/Gaim] entered the room.
(15:19:17) Em Tonkin, UKOLN: afternoon
