On the contrary, I think you should list them all under an menu item called advanced connections.
Users who need these connections will have them and those that don't, probably won't know what they are and thats ok.  


On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Runa A. Sandvik <runa.sandvik@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Lunar <lunar@torproject.org> wrote:
> Mark Smith:
> "If you are not sure how to answer this question, look at the Internet
> settings in another browser to see whethever you are using a proxy":
> I have a feeling this might not be the best advice. Asking users to open
> another browser enhance the likelyhood of them making mistakes.
> I remember Firefox being able to dig connection settings in other
> browsers. Can't such piece of code reused to get a suggestion?

It would be great if we could add some code to check whether or not
the user is using a proxy. If this is not possible, we will have to
think about some text for this screen that does not confuse anyone or
lead to mistakes.

> "Enter a comma-separated list of ports that are allowed by your
> firewall": I find the "your firewall" pretty ironic for most cases
> I know. One's university firewall will not be exactly theirs.

I guess "the" might be a better fit.

> Should pluggable transports be mentioned in any ways?

I don't think we should confuse users too much by listing all the
different options they have for connecting (no bridge, bridge, obfs2,
obfs3).

> Should the short user manual be added to this picture somewhere?

We could link to it, just like we're linking to bridges.tpo and
bridges@tpo. Other options might be to include it in the bundle or
re-use the text as part of a help screen.

--
Runa A. Sandvik
_______________________________________________
tor-dev mailing list
tor-dev@lists.torproject.org
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev