Re: Hurd Mission Statement

[olafBuddenhagen]

Hi,

On Mon, Jun 08, 2009 at 08:58:18PM +1200, Philip Charles wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Jun 2009, olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net wrote:

> > I think it's important to make the mission statement as concise as
> > possible. Adding anything more is always a tradeoff. Does it really
> > make the statement clearer and more appealing; or does it only make
> > it harder to grasp, and distracts from other important points?
> 
> If you must have a mission statement keep it under 35 words - the
> usual advice.

Phew: without the intro part, we have 32 words :-)

I just realized though that it could be made a bit shorter still by
replacing "[...] as much control over their computing environment as
possible" with "[...] maximal control over their computing environment".
What do the others think? Is this wording preferable?

> However, a statement of goals and objectives would be much better.
> 
> I suspect that mission staements are usually public relations
> exercises.  

Well, certainly PR does come in here as well. (Which is a good thing in
my book!)

However, there is more to it. It is crucial to have a clear statement
what the project is all about; what it tries to achieve; why it exists.
Something people can identify with. Something that immediately conveys
whether this is something they are interested in, and perhaps want to
contribute to.

It's also crucial for those who already joined the project: it gives a
direction; something to work towards -- some actual goal to reach.
Something that motivates people to work towards this goal.

Another important use is cutting off unproductive discussions: it's
terribly helpful if we can just point to the mission statement and say,
anything that doesn't help furthering this mission is uncalled-for.

(This is indeed where I got the idea: watching the Google tech-talk
about poisonous people, it's the one thing that really stuck...)

All this requires a *concise* statement, not some exhaustive musings.

-antrik-