[tbb-dev] Request for feedback on grant proposal related to usability
gk at torproject.org
Mon Aug 3 10:41:46 UTC 2015
> I will not be back in time to devote any cycles to this before Monday.
>> Hello folks,
>> I haven't got any votes for a good time to meet yet. I am wondering if
>> tomorrow (Friday) is too soon. Would be better to have feedback via email?
>> My problem is time :) since we will need to submit it soon. Also I would
>> love to incorporate people's feedback before my next meeting with
>> SecondMuse (next Tuesday).
Here comes some feedback in chronological order:
1) Regarding the introduction:
a) Generally, I think it could be streamlined a bit more and trying to
get rid of jargon might be good as well ("transformative impact"
comes to mind here which is used several times but in slightly
b) The first two sentences in the second paragraph don't fit together.
First, you are talking about the usability of anti-censorship tools
and one is expecting in the following sentence to hear something
about it but, surprisingly, you continue talking about issues with
the website and other albeit related things.
c) s/good usability, Is very/good usability, it is very/
2) "to download and redistribute, as well as access the source code and
study or contribute to it"
There is something wrong with that part. Not sure exactly what, but
at least it should be "access to the source code" instead.
3) s/The Tor software allows people/The Tor software that allows people/
4) s/without Tor." When referring/without Tor." when referring/
5) s/number of relays operators/number of relay operators/
6) In the bandwidth graph "2014" and "2015" are not fully visible
7) How does "systems-oriented approach" and "humand-centered approach"
fit together in the SecondMuse case?
8) I'd be happy to have an HTTPS link to the SecondMuse website embedded
in the document but I realize that their TLS cert would throw a
bunch of errors in this case :(
9) There is something missing in the first paragraph in the
"User-Centered Development" section which makes it hard to understand
10) In the "Happy Path" graph: "and inshe application". Not sure what it
is supposed to be instead as "and the application" does not make
sense to me.
11) in the "Happy Path" graph: s/what is the problem is/what the
problem is/ and s/by pass/bypass
12) in the "Happy Path" graph: not sure if every reader would know what
[I'll skip all the nits like typos from here on as it might be smarter
to fix this only once: when the content is fixed]
13) Planning to do two fully cycles of testing per year does not fit to
"A full testing cycle should be done per alpha release.": We have
way more alpha releases than two per year.
14) How is it planned to balance fixing the usability issues found with,
say, fixing crash bugs/linkability/fingerprinting problems between
alphas. I think just concentrating on usability issues won't work.
We should rather pick the most important ones and try to get them
fixed as well (besides all the other issues).
15) Given 14) I am missing steps to explain testers that only some
issues got fixed but not all of them. This is important as it might
otherwise confuse and demotivate testers ("They don't care about
the issues I found!!1!" or "Why does this new version still contain
the bugs I am reporting for months now!1!!").
Overall this seems to be a good idea to me and I am looking forward to
see this testing program happen.
>> I did went through the doc and added *a lot* of new things there to give
>> it more shape. Even if you have already taken a look at it, I would
>> suggest to look again :D because there is much more there from me and
>> from secondmuse as well.
>> Anw, Let me know if I should add more dates for later in the week in
>> doodle or ..
>> On 07/29/2015 04:47 PM, isabela wrote:
>>> Hello there,
>>> I am emailing you because I would like to get some feedback on a
>>> proposal we are trying to put together for SIDA. This proposal is focus
>>> on usability work, and we are applying with SecondMuse (some of you
>>> might know them already).
>>> Is a 4 years contract, but not a lot of money. You can find more
>>> information here:
>>> What is there is just a draft of an idea on how we could build an user
>>> centered development process for Tor Browser, which is to bring
>>> usability checks (user feedback) to early on in the development cycle.
>>> To achieve that, I thought we could do it with our alpha releases.
>>> I left this to the second year of the contract tho, because I thought we
>>> could use the first year to give priority to fix a big broken window for
>>> usability, which is our website. So, I am proposing that during the
>>> first year, while SecondMuse does their needfinding work, we can redo
>>> our site.
>>> I met with Elizabeth from SecondMuse yesterday and we will be updating
>>> this draft with, refining more the idea, we hope to do it by EOD on
>>> Thursday. So I recommend checking it again :)
>>> Here is a doodle for trying to figure out when is a good time to meet.
>>> The deadline for this proposal is August 10, this is why I am trying to
>>> schedule this so soon:
>>> For this meeting I would very much appreciate if we focus on 'what' more
>>> than on 'how'. The goal here is to have an agreement on what we will be
>>> doing for this proposal, since our deadline is very soon.
>>> Let me know if you have questions etc!
>>> Thank you,
>> PM at TorProject.org
>> gpg fingerprint = 8F2A F9B6 D4A1 4D03 FDF1 B298 3224 4994 1506 4C7B
> tbb-dev mailing list
> tbb-dev at lists.torproject.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the tbb-dev