[Epo-marketing] Where from here?

[Chris Prather]

On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 1:39 PM, Mike Whitaker <epo at altrion.org> wrote:

>    - do we release all at once or over a few days?

Depends on how well you think we'll be able to follow up with more
(visible) activities. If we make a big splash up front (release all at
once) and then go dark for six months, we look bad ... but if we
follow up with next week/month with more flurries ...we're okay..

>    - who do we release to? PerlBuzz, use.perl.org for two. Other thoughts?

TPF Blog, EPO Blog/News, /., digg, reddit ...

>    - I'm inclined, for the two working group releases, to not name names
> yet, as ideally we'd like to recruit more members. Is it an idea to at least
> nominate notional /heads/ of WG's for the release, and work from there?
> Thoughts?

About that, looking at the rules laid out
http://www.enlightenedperl.org/rules.html do WG members *have* to be
full EPO members? It *looks* like you only need to be a Full member if
you're gonna vote on a WG's output to become a recommendation
(stealing from teh W3C process here).  If the total membership of a WG
needs to be a full member, let's pick two chumps... er volunteers ...
announce those two as the Chairpeople and go with that. Otherwise name
as many names as we have and annouce we're still looking to fill out
the groups.

> - What else do we want to announce/do? I'd like to keep a reasonable stream
> of announcements going, as it keeps us visible?

I think that the next part here is for the Working Groups to start
making announcements on their own. And start moving forward. The
groups should reasonably soon (two weeks, month at the latest)
announce a schedule for when their respective output will be
published. And then follow that schedule. As much as teh W3C is bogged
down with bureaucracy now ... that's I think the best model for what
we want to achieve with our (EPO) goals.