> I only mean to say that I have some doubts > about the efficacy of on-list conversation, because I do not see much > participation from members of the TAC.
That's, i think, the consequences of using mail-lists (among other). What i'm trying to explain in "Discussion system for FreedomBox Foundation" topic, now we have two mailing lists, one half-ERP and half-Wiki instead of one open and user-friendly ERP and one user-friendly discussion/proposition system around (or, as a coupled part), that leads to the obvious mess. > I would be happy to be told that I'm wrong on this one, and that a > quorum is indeed present. Just thought I would see if anyone else if > having similar feelings. What is the organisational structure here? > What does it mean? Who are we? Is this a worthwhile question? FreedomBox isn't the typical W3C/IETF/GNU-distributive "working group" As i understand - it has a much broader scope and auditory, much more dependent on "out-side" view and participation. By that - usual tools don't suit without re-tailoring or complete re-factoring. I believe that conclusion of TAC separation is coming from these - two lists, 5 systems separation view (2 types of lists, wiki, release control system+ERP), not from actual difference in intentions and positions. > Perhaps we could adopt something of a 'harm reduction' approach here. > It's like binge drinking in colleges. We know that people are going to > do it anyway, so we should do whatever we can to make them safe in > doing so. More than that, as Daniel said, there is value in it. +1 > I'll only add that anonymity is part of the authentication spectrum, > but it's not the only part that matters. Giving people distinct and > understandable choices as regards their mode of access seems > essential. That means providing mechanisms not just for anonymization, > but for building avatars which are identified but not verified, and > finally for presenting an identity that is verifiably linked to a person. +1! > I'll just put it > this way: it sucks not knowing if big decisions are being made in a > room somewhere. That the situation you could see widely in organizations(many kinds) that wasn't able to introduce a user-friendly and open to broad view(in this case) ERP for the whole organizational needs. > We've just got to divide the problem up into little actionable parts, that's what is hardly done in non-efficient community systems. You could have a man that separate it all but if you could have a people who, collaboratively one by one - separate and polish the view and path of organization, the difference is amazing. > This needs to be done early and often, with input from real, > non-technical users as an integral part of the design process. I'm > happy to test on my family! I'm a UI-UX designer for life and - the proposed separation but openness is what - often helps the designers to make their best and still - didn't learn all the near-by professions, thankfully, i have a big management experience, also, so - with my designer work i'm able to figure out - how the entire system work to make the best graphical design choices, however - it's the corner-stone of usual web-design problems, in result - you often see (at least it was popular, in the past) that programmers became to designers and otherwise that, obviously(i can show many examples) lead to "these" systems - half here and half there, that's the specific problem of Open-Source, particularly, as many PM's think that they could easily manage it all "on the go" and without ERP, however, other team members often need a more declared separation (on pair with openness and clear understanding of what is going around - maybe not the full detailed specification as it's involving all the learning around, but - clear view on the path and ways of the project). So - separation of activities could bring the good result, only, if combined with tide and dynamic encyclopaedia of project's knowledge and decisions, i think. _______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
