324658 - Better Wording for reporter

Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX

(Other Applications Graveyard :: Reporter, defect)

Description

[Robert Accettura [:raccettura]]

As Jesse mentioned on my blog, a problem right now with reporter is people are misusing it when reporting.

This is a minority of cases (but enough to superinflate google).  They launch their browser and report, regardless of the URL.  Often just quoting the URL in the description area.  In a few cases it's just feedback (no associated url).

Ideally, we could find a way to clarify how to use reporter, perhaps with better wording.  

This bug is to explore options.

Comment 1

[Mike Beltzner [:beltzner, not reading bugmail]]

Are people using this mechanism to give us general feedback about the browser? Maybe we want to actually make that an option. mconnor: how does this mesh with your recent thoughts about merging our feedback mechanisms like Hendrix with a new online help system.

Comment 2

[Robert Accettura [:raccettura]]

Yes, in some cases that's whats happening.  I've seen a number of bugs to the effect of "crashed on a website.  Please fix it ASAP", or "I'm having a problem...".  

Adding an option is an idea... but I'd rather not collect data unless there's a use for it.  Could we perhaps use reporter as a frontend for initiating a request in a new help system?

Between this, and safe browsing, it looks like reporter may eventually morph into a more consumer relations type exension than evangelism... which is spiffy in my book.

Other than that...I've got no objections to handling the problem with a new option.  I just want to make sure that the feedback doesn't end up in /dev/null.

Comment 3

[Mike Beltzner [:beltzner, not reading bugmail]]

(In reply to comment #2)
> Adding an option is an idea... but I'd rather not collect data unless there's 

Even if all it did with that data ATM is routed it to Hendrix, it would be a win. But mconnor has some swanky ideas for dealing with it later. Assuming the server side component can just route the data as required, can we not switch that whenver we want?

> Between this, and safe browsing, it looks like reporter may eventually morph
> into a more consumer relations type exension than evangelism... which is 

Is Safe Browsing definitely going to contribute there, too? Nice.

So what's becoming of this bug, then? Better wording to accomodate these alternate uses?

Comment 4

[Robert Accettura [:raccettura]]

(In reply to comment #3)
> 
> Even if all it did with that data ATM is routed it to Hendrix, it would be a
> win. But mconnor has some swanky ideas for dealing with it later. Assuming the
> server side component can just route the data as required, can we not switch
> that whenver we want?
> 

Just let me know what I can do to help.  I could modify reporter to forward reports based on a "problem_type" or other field as appropriate if that would help.

> 
> Is Safe Browsing definitely going to contribute there, too? Nice.
> 

I've been playing with the idea.  By adding a new 'problem type' it's feasable to use reporter as a way to collect data (likely with some human moderation, or some fancy data processing), and either become a service... or let other services use the data to make their own blacklists.

This of course depends on if safebrowsing will be included in a future release among other things.  It's just an idea I've been toying with.

Reporter's big advantage is the ability to collect url's.  Soon it will have done that 200k times.

> So what's becoming of this bug, then? Better wording to accomodate these
> alternate uses?
> 

That's up to mconnor in regards to approach.  I'd just like to prevent misuse of the tool to improve the signal:noise ratio.  Either by wording, or by adding another option etc.

I think there are a lot of choices on the table.

Comment 5

[Mike Beltzner [:beltzner, not reading bugmail]]

Just as a point of reference, IE7b2 has started accepting beta feedback through a menuitem, which is kinda like what I'm suggesting we do with reporter, too :)

http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2006/04/28/586188.aspx

Comment 6

[Robert Accettura [:raccettura]]

I'm pretty flexible for the most part.  My only point is that data going nowhere is bad.  We either need to clarify wording, or put the data somewhere that it can be used.

Just let me know what the preference is, and I'm happy to move towards that model. 

I'm not really sure what the status is for that new tech support mechanism... where does that plan stand, and where should we go?

Comment 7

[Gids Goldberg]

To some extent you are digging your own hole by calling it 'Report Broken Website' and not 'Report This Website As Broken'
If you want to keep the wording the same, maybe you could start Reporter with bullet point options:

(o) Report a problem with the current website - 'website domain'
(o) Report a problem with another website: (initially greyed out text box for URL)

Comment 8

[Sylvestre Ledru [:Sylvestre]]

Reporter isn't a maintained project. Closing!