Business card templates? #51
Comments
|
We have a nice template that Cameron made. Not at my laptop but we can look for the materials - Ana would know how/where to order
…Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 22, 2018, at 8:35 AM, Chris Holdgraf ***@***.***> wrote:
Hey all - I was just chatting with @jzf2101 about how it'd be useful to have a business card to give to people when they wanna connect with the Jupyter community.
Do we have any business card templates that are easy for others to replicate? If not I can try to mock up and submit a PR
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
|
|
@Ruv7 pinging you since you weren't @'ed :-) |
|
This design and ordering options are on Moo.com - I sent you an invite to
the portal though it's been some time since I've used this. Let me take a
look around and let you know what next steps are.
…On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 10:35 AM Chris Holdgraf ***@***.***> wrote:
@Ruv7 <https://github.com/Ruv7> pinging you since you weren't @'ed :-)
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#51 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AP4tWdBRnuIhvRr1ATIzXVK0TfdtzdLLks5ungG8gaJpZM4Xzm4m>
.
|
|
cool, thanks! I got an invite to moo, though it's a bit unclear to me where the designs etc are :-) perhaps we could upload the business card EPS or SVG to this repo? |
|
Different folks chose different content, so send what you think works for you. |
|
Oops, our messages crossed paths. Cameron uploaded these files directly to Moo on my behalf. My next step if you want to use this design is to find the SVG file as I don't know currently know where this is located. I'll get back to you. |
|
Cool! I can replicate this design pretty easily and upload some SVGs |
|
you probably don't need to replicate it. @tgeorgeux - can you look for this design? |
|
i wanted to make sure you liked it before bothering to look for it. there is a discount for ordering through our business account if you'd like to use that lmk so i can upload it to our master |
|
Here's a Google Slides version of the business card: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1nLApzUWsAjyWIijIfS-S-VjLPSUwUC0YR6D0_PasmZY/edit?usp=sharing NOTE - this link is no longer viewable w/o access, if you want it email me We can easily collaborate, make small edits, etc. Then export as a 2.5" x 3.5" PDF: |
|
thanks to @jzf2101 who gave me the idea to use google slides, btw |
|
IMHO I like what we had using the slides template... gimme a minute to mock up what I mean |
|
I like that too! Why not just have each of the color schemes as both fronts and backs and people can order whatever they like? |
|
I added @jzf2101's design to the google slides! |
|
Having different cards is a bit like a soccer team having different jerseys depending on what color they like. The idea behind these cards is that they were for core contributors and since we don't currently have a way to designate who that includes I can see this being publicly available for print as a potential issue. I had also spent a significant amount of time setting up a group account and finding a good quality printer. Feels a bit like we've reinvented the wheel here and I'm not sure why. |
|
My reasoning is to re-create the design in a format that is more transparent and accessible to others. Note that I'm intentionally not changing the design much, just putting it in a google slides format. The alternative colors are a new addition (though all within the Jupyter color scheme). I'm happy to keep using the same group account / printer / etc, this is just a way to have the designs available in a form that doesn't require stuff like emailing a person to look for SVG files that are in a single person's filesystem somewhere |
|
That said, if you feel strongly about not having the business card template in a public place for other contributors, then I can take this down until the community agrees on a process for this. I don't want to come across as making executive decisions here, just trying to be helpful! |
|
These cards were meant for core developers, not the community at large and should be uniform. The settings on the group account with Moo.com allow for an administrator (me) to upload designs so it's not possible for you to upload your own. I think this is flagging for us what is possibly a governance issue but there will be times when central management of a resource and quality control makes sense for things representing our brand in the community. If I spend time researching, designing, and creating marketing items for Jupyter it does not make sense for other core contributors on the team to create their own. |
|
Maybe we can have Tim migrate the card to Figma so it easy for others to
work with?
…On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 11:09 AM Chris Holdgraf ***@***.***> wrote:
That said, if you feel strongly about not having the business card
template in a public place for other contributors, then I can take this
down until the community agrees on a process for this. I don't want to come
across as making executive decisions here, just trying to be helpful!
—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#51 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABr0AgBdWlu9pK-_T4XxkL3KQ6WSioWks5un1tPgaJpZM4Xzm4m>
.
--
Brian E. Granger
Associate Professor of Physics and Data Science
Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo
@ellisonbg on Twitter and GitHub
bgranger@calpoly.edu and ellisonbg@gmail.com
|
|
A bit more context...
For the marketing items we have done (T-shirts, stickers, cards, signs) we
have spent a ton of time doing research, ordering & reviewing physical
samples to check for color, color correction, fit, design, materials, etc.
This is on top of the raw design work itself. Even for the business cards,
we had ordered sample materials, and reviewed a test run. At any
significant scale, physical materials are expensive, so it is worth doing
this. At one point, we ordered a couple thousand $ of T-shirts, and they
didn't turn out right, so we had to send them back and get them re-printed.
…On Tue, Oct 23, 2018 at 11:20 AM Ana Ruvalcaba ***@***.***> wrote:
These cards were meant for core developers, not the community at large and
should be uniform. The settings on the group account with Moo.com allow for
an administrator (me) to upload designs so it's not possible for you to
upload your own. I think this is flagging for us what is possibly a
governance issue but there will be times when central management of a
resource and quality control makes sense for things representing our brand
in the community. If I spend time researching, designing, and creating
marketing items for Jupyter it does not make sense for other core
contributors on the team to create their own.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#51 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABr0LoaURCUeszCvZ-SCOsMji5Fy4HWks5un13ngaJpZM4Xzm4m>
.
--
Brian E. Granger
Associate Professor of Physics and Data Science
Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo
@ellisonbg on Twitter and GitHub
bgranger@calpoly.edu and ellisonbg@gmail.com
|
|
Sorry for the confusion - by "jupyter community" I meant core contributors to the projects. I didn't realize that the jupyter community had already agreed on a policy regarding things like business cards, and didn't see any mention of it in these repositories (for example, in the brand guide, or in the governance repo), which is why I brought it up here. I'll remove access for these templates then. If it isn't already (maybe I just missed it), I'd find it useful if the process around "who controls/produces artifacts that use the jupyter brand" was explicit somewhere. edit: oops, didn't mean to close the issue...I'll keep it open until I figure out how to get my hands on some business cards lol |
|
Hi all, Apologies it took me quite a time to respond, I will try to be short. I want to point out that in this kind of conversation, especially if you are not well acquainted with the people in this thread, a big impression of Gatekeeping transpires. I'm not going to give names, but I'm going to speak up and say that I'm not the only one who is starting to – even as a core dev – get tired of this kind of interaction and end up keeping people out of the loop on purpose and do things behind people back. I believe that the effect above is in no way intentional nor due to a single person, but keep in mind that we are not a top-down hierarchy, and that "one size fits all" often lead to "one thing fits nobody". I definitely did not like the business card design that was done – and did not order any, but that's a personal choice. I didn't either agree that everyone should the same. Having something that have a theme is great, and making it easy for people to get in the team is nice. But we have core developers from IBM, Bloomberg, University of California, ... and many other company , and it is understandable that each would like to have both their employer and Jupyter on their business card. I don't see any obstacle to make material available to the wider community to allow making business card easy. If it is misused then it is another story. But honestly
I'm going to stop there for this issue and I am happy that Chris is trying to reach out. As a personal note: About a month ago I started at UC Merced, and have a bit less time to be keep myself up-to-date on a daily basis, but the Project Looks really like a black box, and it's disheartening to hear a tone in many conversation that things are reserved "only for the core team", especially since many people that are key to Jupyter success would probably not be considered part of the Core Team. So I'd like to encourage everyone to take a step back and attempt to switch their tone from "Yes But", to "Yes And". Many thanks, and missing you all ! |
|
From the perspective of somebody who is not on the steering council, I must admit that it does seem opaque. Rules like these and the process for deciding them isn't documented in the open in a discoverable place. I agree with @Ruv7 that this sounds like a governance and transparency question. Centralized control often does make sense for quality control in some organizations, though the process by which "The Jupyter Community decided this" should be more transparent IMO. regarding the design, thinking about it more I probably won't use the "official" jupyter card in this case (the gradients and the non-right-justified text on the right side of the card just bug the heck out of me, but I'm weird like that). I'll close this issue since it's more specific to the location of a "template" I could use, and it sounds like the answer is "email @Ruv7 if you want a card and there is only one design option". If people want to discuss whether this is the right policy in this case, I'm happy to chime in on another issue but I don't want to force the conversation if it's already been discussed in the steering council |
|
It's been over 2 years since we looked at the original design which Cameron (former intern) and I created in time for SciPy my first year here. I had asked to revisit that design over the summer in time for JupyterCon this year but other projects of higher importance and urgency from our list of were prioritized. I wouldn't say it's accurate that I'm not open to re-designing this but the approach is what is problematic for me. I see this as a part what should be an ongoing / wider discussion about how operations and design decisions get made at Jupyter. I would be love for us to be talking about more as we work toward our new governance model. We have not previously addressed this topic as a steering council and having more voices on this from the wider group can make a big impact to my work and how I interact with this team. My background for the past 10+ years is in corporations ranging from a few people to the many thousands so I'm open to getting the feedback that something I'm doing doesn't match the culture of open source. While I've been here 3 years - there are some things that I am still learning about this environment and the expectations of this group. What I seek to understand is resistance to any part of our processes being centralized or managed by one or a few people. I'm not sure if that's a lack of trust, a resistance to growth/changes, or a lack of clarity surrounding how decisions should be made within our organization. As a team grows it seems inevitable that decision by consensus is not always feasible or practical. If an Engineer at Microsoft would prefer a different design than the business card the design/marketing team comes up with, do they venture out and design and print his own? Probably not - for various reasons related not only to efficiency of their time but also for team culture. I'm open to having you print your own cards or to facilitating the design for you (Tim and Zach want cards also) but I don't want to block you if you're working towards using this at a specific event or if you have a deadline. I'm ok with closing this out here with the idea that we'll discuss this topic at a later date as a part of a bigger conversation about how design decisions get made for all brand related materials. |
|
@Ruv7 just to be clear: this in no way reflects a lack of trust or confidence that I have for anyone in the project. You are great :-) I'm just giving my perspective and bringing in the context that I've had in other open projects. In my experience, gatekeeping in general (e.g. giving a single or small subset of people the ability to control whether others can or cannot do something) should be done sparingly and only with full transparency. If not done sparingly, it slows down the project because everybody has to wait to ask somebody else before something can happen. If not done transparently, it opens the door to people informally aggregating power (whether intentionally or not) and this can have harmful effects on the broader community. In this case, what's weird to me isn't that one person is "in charge" of something like business cards, but that there's no record of the Jupyter community at-large deciding that this is what we're collectively going to follow. (as an side, this is a reason why I really like the Rust RFCS process, which is basically a list of all major decisions that have been made in the project since RFCs started) For example, in the earlier days of the Binder project, I was the only one that had access to the Google Cloud project for Binder. I didn't initially think it was a big deal (and people would occasionally email me saying "hey can you do this thing") but somebody pointed out to me that this was effectively making me "in control" of Binder. We've since tried to give as many people access to as many things as possible. We still have a ways to go for Binder (e.g. only recently did we finally transfer ownership of the DNS from me to a shared Jupyter account), so it's important that we continually attempt to decentralize power by default, and be very careful and explicit when we centralize power be choice. |
|
Fully agree that more transparency and openness is better, and that
gatekeeping isn't helpful. Our struggles in working on the organizational,
operations, design side of the project:
* From an operations perspective, the business cards are a relatively small
thing. By that, I mean that we make hundreds of decisions like this each
year (the granularity is similar to that of PRs on a major repo).
* Operations and design doesn't happen on GitHub - this is the world of
spreadsheets, email, scanned pdfs, word documents, etc. GitHub is entirely
dev-centric, which essentially makes this type of work hidden by default.
GitHub provides scoping, decision records, history, collaboration, teams,
permission, etc. We have looked at software that provides those things for
non-dev work, and basically it is things like Google Drive of Office 365
for small organizations. I would *love* that, but there has to be buy in,
and importantly it 1) costs per head and 2) it is still closed by default.
*We have far too resources for the non-technical parts of the project
(governance, operations, events, design, outreach, etc.). This means that
for everything we do accomplish, we are dropping the ball on many others.
Compared to dozens of other things, business cards have been a low
priority. In an under-resourced organization, "delegation" means dropping
the ball.
A great example of this is that we have hundreds of design related files in
a shared dropbox folder. These are Sketch, Illustrator, etc files that
cover vast parts of the project (software, events, physical stuff, etc,
website, business cards). These are not private - this folder is shared
with many of the core team (including Matthias, Carol, Thomas, Ana, Tim,
Fernando, Paul). It is big enough that dumping the work on GitHub is not an
option. We would like to migrate to an online solution (such as Figma), but
we need to go through these files one by one and make decisions about what
to do with them (archive them somewhere, migrate to Figma, push to GitHub).
The business cards are one of those hundreds of files.
I also think we need more transparency and openness on the development
side, but GitHub is such a dominant part of the workflow, the realization
of the issues looks pretty different.
…On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:20 PM Chris Holdgraf ***@***.***> wrote:
@Ruv7 <https://github.com/Ruv7> just to be clear: *this in no way
reflects a lack of trust or confidence that I have for anyone in the
project*. I'm just giving my perspective and bringing in the context that
I've had in other open projects.
In my experience, gatekeeping in general (e.g. giving a single or small
subset of people the ability to control whether others can or cannot do
something) should be done sparingly and only with full transparency. If not
done sparingly, it slows down the project because everybody has to wait to
ask somebody else before something can happen. If not done transparently,
it opens the door to people informally aggregating power (whether
intentionally or not) and this can have harmful effects on the broader
community. In this case, what's weird to me isn't that one person is "in
charge" of something like business cards, but that there's no record of the
Jupyter community at-large deciding that this is what we're collectively
going to follow. (as an side, this is a reason why I really like the Rust
RFCS process <http://rust-lang.github.io/rfcs/>, which is basically a
list of all major decisions that have been made in the project since RFCs
started)
For example, in the earlier days of the Binder project, I was the only one
that had access to the Google Cloud project for Binder. I didn't initially
think it was a big deal (and people would occasionally email me saying "hey
can you do this thing") but somebody pointed out to me that this was
effectively making me "in control" of Binder. We've since tried to give as
many people access to as many things as possible. We still have a ways to
go for Binder (e.g. only recently did we finally transfer ownership of the
DNS from me to a shared Jupyter account), so it's important that we
continually attempt to decentralize power by default, and be very careful
and explicit when we centralize power be choice.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#51 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABr0FSsLdP0td4FgcHs0OhvwoOIaLlEks5uoNmmgaJpZM4Xzm4m>
.
--
Brian E. Granger
Associate Professor of Physics and Data Science
Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo
@ellisonbg on Twitter and GitHub
bgranger@calpoly.edu and ellisonbg@gmail.com
|
|
I guess to me there are three separate things:
I'm more concerned with 2 and 3 in this case, neither of which were clear to me. Though as Ana says, I think this is a broader governance challenge and probably best to discuss in a different setting. I definitely empathize that these things take a lot of effort...though I would note that this is one reason to use open, community practices. In this case, I was saying "hey everybody here is an open google template that anybody can fork and use for their purposes, now where can we put this in the documentation so it's discoverable and easy for others to use?" The whole point was to remove bottlenecks and avoid balls being dropped because we're under-resourced from an operations perspective (which I agree we are). |
|
Your 1,2,3 describe the different aspects well ;-) I fully agree about using open, community practices as default and as much as possible, but another aspect of non-technical work is that it is often pseudo-public. By that, I mean there are parts of the process (for example the visual design of a business card, decisions about who should be able to have such a card, signals to the community about it all) that can be fully open, but other parts that are more sensitive and can't be fully public (what does our budget at Cal Poly for these things look like and who should we offer to pay for business cards for, how do design/material/vendor questions feedback into the design, how do we make the payment, etc.). Also, these things types of activities have significant impact on individuals time allocations on the project that have to be discussed. This isn't unique to Cal Poly - every organization participating in Jupyter has internal processes that overlap and intersect with that of the open project in complicated ways that are difficult to cleanly separate. The Jupyter Community Workshops, JupyterDays, JupyterCon, Team Meetings, etc. all have these similar characteristics. I do think continuing these discussions on a broader setting would be helpful. |
|
What's the right forum for having these conversations? I suppose that if/when some proposals start coming in for a governance structure, it'll surface some of these issues in conversation? |
|
I think an issue on the public governance repo is probably a good start,
but open to other ideas.
…On Thu, Oct 25, 2018 at 10:42 AM Chris Holdgraf ***@***.***> wrote:
What's the right forum for having these conversations? I suppose that
if/when some proposals start coming in for a governance structure, it'll
surface some of these issues in conversation?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#51 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AABr0MuSmTI1EcqxKbQLXBgWHGAgMh9fks5uoffzgaJpZM4Xzm4m>
.
--
Brian E. Granger
Associate Professor of Physics and Data Science
Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo
@ellisonbg on Twitter and GitHub
bgranger@calpoly.edu and ellisonbg@gmail.com
|
Hey all - I was just chatting with @jzf2101 about how it'd be useful to have a business card to give to people when they wanna connect with the Jupyter community.
Do we have any business card templates that are easy for others to replicate? If not I can try to mock up and submit a PR
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: