| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 3377.1 | Thought For Food | HLDE01::VUURBOOM_R | Roelof Vuurboom @ APD, DTN 829 4066 | Fri Sep 09 1994 15:20 | 4 |
| >you'll be attending. (We'd like to be sure we've
>booked enough space and have enough copies.) Feel
..or should that read "and have enough cookies."?
|
| 3377.2 | I'd volunteer if.... | GUCCI::COWPERTHWAIT | | Fri Sep 09 1994 16:22 | 1 |
| DO YOU GET COOKIES FOR JUST RESPONDING???
|
| 3377.3 | | TOKNOW::METCALFE | Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers | Fri Sep 09 1994 16:49 | 13 |
| No, no, that's not the right question.
I want to know what KIND of cookies. I hate those coconut-covered
things with unidentifiable fruit or nutty things inside! Give me
a good, lard-based Oreo anyday.
A [my] reply to this note should not be misconstrued as the remotest
willingness to test documentation for food. Come to think of it, I
already do that.
I may reconsider if the contract is negotiable, though. ;-)
Mark
|
| 3377.4 | | MUZICK::WARNER | It's only work if they make you do it | Fri Sep 09 1994 18:12 | 8 |
| Is this what we've come to...
"Will test documentation for food."
???
;^)
|
| 3377.5 | it must be jelly cos jam ain't spelled like that | SMURF::WALTERS | | Fri Sep 09 1994 19:10 | 6 |
|
> "Will test documentation for food."
It's easy to test documentation for food. Most food leaves some
kind of a stain. %-)
|
| 3377.6 | I Don't Wanna Play! | WMOIS::STYVES_A | | Fri Sep 09 1994 20:13 | 6 |
| If you're going to use words like "modularity" then I've flunked
already. I don't think I want to play. Can I have a cookie anyway?
Arty
|
| 3377.7 | Something tells me you guys are being serious | WEORG::SHEPARD | | Fri Sep 09 1994 20:46 | 11 |
| Do I detect a sliver of sarcasm and a whistle of wit contained in these
preceding replies?????
YES I DO!
[Sandwich sign for rent: Will ____ for food: soon-to-be-former
Digital employee, currently a commodity.]
;-)
Susan
|
| 3377.8 | Sorry, meant: ...you guys areN'T being serious | WEORG::SHEPARD | | Fri Sep 09 1994 20:47 | 11 |
| Do I detect a sliver of sarcasm and a whistle of wit contained in these
preceding replies?????
YES I DO!
[Sandwich sign for rent: Will ____ for food: soon-to-be-former
Digital employee, currently a commodity.]
;-)
Susan
|
| 3377.9 | | GLDOA::SHOOK | standby - the wild night is calling | Fri Sep 09 1994 22:37 | 12 |
| > Do I detect a sliver of sarcasm and a whistle of wit contained in these
> preceding replies?????
> YES I DO!
> [Sandwich sign for rent: Will ____ for food: soon-to-be-former
> Digital employee, currently a commodity.]
> ;-)
one mo' time...
|
| 3377.10 | We Want Our Cookies | HLDE01::VUURBOOM_R | Roelof Vuurboom @ APD, DTN 829 4066 | Sat Sep 10 1994 09:03 | 5 |
| Re: .8
What do you mean we aren't being serious?
WE REALLY DO WANT OUR COOKIES!
|
| 3377.11 | | CSC32::M_EVANS | skewered shitake | Mon Sep 12 1994 18:35 | 10 |
| At the risk of asking irritating questions, why arent they running the
documentation through a test group where we have to support this stuff?
There is no way I can get from colorado to any of these other sites to
look over the latest in network documentation and whether or not I will
be able to walk a customer through it.
meg
Forget the cookies, I'll do it for beef jerky
|
| 3377.12 | Why not colorado??Good question | USABLE::RAVEN | | Mon Sep 12 1994 21:49 | 22 |
| Congratulations, Meg, you asked the first non-cookie question!
It would be ideal to have people in the support centers participate.
I am to blame for not encouraging people to volunteer to test the
document remotely (I have had a few people volunteer to do that).
We are testing 3 versions of the same document, so one person only
tests one version. If you would like, I can send you a pointer to one
of the versions and the test questions, and you can time yourself.
This test is not funded or being conducted by POLYCENTER engineering or
its writers, but rather by a group of people who are interested in
whether different organizations of the same info have an impact on
usability. Thus, we have a teeny weeny budget (like, you folks didn't
expect that the company was paying for those cookies, did you??)
Otherwise, I would be happy to hand-deliver and administer the test in
Colorado.
Mary Beth Raven
P.S. The cookies are "gourmet chocolate chunk" from the Alexander's
Shop n save bakery...
|
| 3377.13 | | CSC32::M_EVANS | skewered shitake | Tue Sep 13 1994 13:32 | 6 |
| Thanks Mary Beth, I would love a pointer. It is a shame that these
documents are never seen by those who support the products with
customers before they are sent out. (and in many times the customers
have the documentation before we even know the stuff is out there.)
meg
|
| 3377.14 | | TOOK::MORRISON | Bob M. LKG1-3/A11 226-7570 | Tue Sep 13 1994 17:09 | 1 |
| "Will test documents for cookies". That's a great slogan.
|
| 3377.15 | now how 'bout those cookies/ | POWDML::SMCCONNELL | Next year, in Jerusalem! | Tue Sep 13 1994 20:31 | 15 |
| I responded to a "usability test" that was posted in this conference (I
think) - to test how easy it is to get an Alpha PC up and running
having received the 2 or 3 boxes in the mail.
I got no cookies; perhaps because I performed miserably and sweat
nervously (and profusely) all over the PC as I was putting it together.
Personally - I'd pay money to have the video tape so I could destroy
it. Hopefully, it wasn't for naught as the testing team got a decent
laugh out of it.
Anytime I can help,
Steve
|
| 3377.16 | | TOKNOW::METCALFE | Eschew Obfuscatory Monikers | Wed Sep 14 1994 18:44 | 6 |
| Steve,
You'd sweat all over the cookies and get the documentation soggy to boot!
:-)
MM
|
| 3377.17 | | POWDML::SMCCONNELL | Next year, in Jerusalem! | Wed Sep 14 1994 19:53 | 4 |
| Sir, I *never* sweat near, around, or over cookies. Drool? Perhaps,
but NEVER sweat!
(Documentation is, of course, anudder story ;-)
|
| 3377.18 | they are worth it | WELCLU::62967::SHARKEYA | ISDN rules ! | Wed Sep 14 1994 22:04 | 3 |
| Hey, I travel thousands of miles for those sort of cookies. Just ask Trish!
alan
|