Confusion over the name "Overleaf Pro" and visuals of https://overleaf-pro.ayaka.space

[castedo]

I'm creating this issue here to hopefully redirect comments on a more focused issue of the name "Overleaf Pro" and visuals on https://overleaf-pro.ayaka.space

I do think the name and the visuals are creating strong negative reactions and confusion as evidences on by

overleaf/overleaf#782 (comment)

I hope this helps constructive discussion to happen here in this issue.

[castedo]

It sounds like the work behind "Overleaf Pro" is wonderful and valuable. I hope you feel good about your contributions. When we are deep into a project often it is very hard to see the perspective of new comers and outsiders who do not know you or your work.

I can honestly say, as someone who does not know you or your project, that the visuals on https://overleaf-pro.ayaka.space/ and the name "Overleaf Pro" is very confusing. I can honestly say my reaction is that the maintainers of this website are somehow trying to trick visitors into thinking they are officially associated with overleaf.com.

[castedo]

I will write some hopefully constructive specific details that I think cause confusion.

The logo in the upper-left corner of https://overleaf-pro.ayaka.space/ is essentially the same as the one used by overleaf.com. This makes overleaf-pro.ayaka.space seem like it is trying to present itself as a website of overleaf.com.

[castedo]

The language of "XYZ Pro" and "XYZ Pro Edition" when XYZ is a company is often used for paid products or services from XYZ company. So the website comes across as presenting itself as trying to sell or charge for a service from overleaf.com when it is not overleaf.com

I imagine maybe your intention is the "Pro" means higher quality and like Overleaf.com Professional offering. But I think many visitors think you are trying to sell something.

[castedo]

Using the exactly same green color I think also contributes to the impression you are trying to appear as a website run by overleaf.com

[castedo]

There is a subsection on the home page titled "Read more about overleaf developer document." with an image to the left with the text "Overleaf Developer Documentation". I think this also contributes to the impression that your website it trying to appear as something produced by overleaf.com

[castedo]

Those some of the points I wanted to make quickly to hopefully give you some constructive feedback. I'm happy to look at or suggest possible changes if you would like.

@Musicminion At a more personally level, I'm sorry I'm only listing negatives. I really do think you have done some excellent valuable work you should be proud of. Remember that so many of us online don't know you and don't really know your work but make negative comments online. I hope you can still be motivated to do good work for yourself and the people who will recognize the good despite those that are unaware.

[gabriel-vanca]

overleaf/overleaf#782 (comment)

[gabriel-vanca]

I thank @castedo for being perhaps more diplomatic than me. My legal and cybersecurity training made me jump right in when I saw all those red flags he and I mentioned. It genuinely comes off as a phishing attempt (either with the aim to sell something, hence the 'Pro', or to spread malware).

[castedo]

overleaf/overleaf#782 (comment)

In fact, your repo states: "We run a hosted version at www.overleaf.com" (the deceit).

I think part of the problem on this point is that this repository is a fork of the Overleaf Community Edition and @gabriel-vanca is reading the README of the Overleaf Community Edition but at this GitHub address. So the way git and GitHub work creates some confusion.

[castedo]

I thank @castedo for being perhaps more diplomatic than me.

It's because so many times in my life I have been as un-diplomatic as you are being now. 😜 I'm making up for past sins. 😅

[gabriel-vanca]

overleaf/overleaf#782 (comment)

In fact, your repo states: "We run a hosted version at www.overleaf.com" (the deceit).

I think part of the problem on this point is that this repository is a fork of the Overleaf Community Edition and @gabriel-vanca is reading the README of the Overleaf Community Edition but at this GitHub address. So the way git and GitHub work creates some confusion.

Indeed. The fact that it doesn't have the usual "forked from" tag under the project name makes it look even more fishy. I cannot tell whether that is a bug with GitHub or the project was forked offline and then a new repo was created on Github.

[Musicminion]

Thank you for your suggestions. I have made the following changes:

1. Removed the logo and modified the documentation website’s style to make it different from Overleaf.
2. Since GitHub Actions cannot run scheduled workflows in forked repositories, I have removed the fork relationship. Github action is responsible for code sync from upstream.
3. Added a clarification that this project is built based on the Community Edition.
4. All pull requests are reviewed by Codex, and the review results can be seen directly within the PR.
5. Readmd is modified already even earlier, but in Feature: GitHub sync #27, will be merged later in 6.2.0

[castedo]

Great step to change the logo. That will definitely help.

You have many tricky trade-offs to make regarding each of the points of confusion I have written. Especially point #42 (comment) regarding the text "Overleaf Pro".

Purely as ideas and suggestions for you to consider, if you decide to stick with using the text "Overleaf Pro" for whatever reason, maybe appending in the words "Fork" or "Spin" or using "Fork" or "Spin" and/or replacing "Edition" with the words "Fork" or "Spin" will also help.

I really do think that in most English speaking countries the pattern "XYZ Pro" when "XYZ" is a company signals something that is sold by the company XYZ. Perhaps part of the problem is the overleaf.com (the company) did not do what redhat.com (the company) did which is create a name like "Fedora" that can be used more loosely and broadly by an open-source community.

With so many new shocking developments in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_chain_attack, AI generated fraud, cyber-spying by large governments, etc..., I think it's wise to try and avoid presenting open-source software as though it's coming form a company when you are not that company.