Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Brett Cornwall]

On 2020-07-09 19:54, Nicolas Christener wrote:

Hi all

On Thu, 2020-07-09 at 01:51 +0200, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
[...]

One comment:

- I'd strongly suggest that any new tool we introduce comes with a
  commitment to shutdown / discourage at least one (but better more!)
  existing tool. We'll otherwise quickly get to https://xkcd.com/927/ ;)

So if https://democraciaos.org/ is to solve the
too-many-communication-channels problem - are we then shutting down
IRC/Telegram, or even the mailing lists?


IMHO IRC/Telegram and mailing lists have different aims. One is for "instant
communication" the other is for "more complex discussions".

I love mailing lists and was quite "shocked", when other big F/OSS projects
started to move away (see for example [0]). However at some point I realized,
that the hurdles to participate in discussion on mailing lists are indeed too
high([1]) for many people. I'm not sure if killing all mailing lists is what I
would propose - but why not discussing to move most of the "non developer"
lists to something like discourse (and migrate AskBot as well)?

Some half-baked thoughts:
* Talk to e.g. the Gnome folks about their experience regarding Discourse
* Discuss a migration of AskBot to tool xyz
 -> could be Discourse or whatever people like
* Discuss migrating a set of mailinglists to the same tool

Thoughts?

[0] https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2019-February/msg1.html
[1] Younger people don't have an e-mail address anymore, signing up requires
   too man steps, spam is an issue, most people don't know how to quote
   mails, etc.

All the best,
Nicolas


I'd agree to using Discourse [1]. I genuinely think this one has potential to 
solve LO/TDF's communications needs. For the unaware, Discourse was started by 
Jeff Atwood (of Stack Overflow fame) and is free software. Think of it like a 
forum software for those that use the web interface, and a mailing list for 
those that use it with email.


Some arguments for Discourse:

* Easier user engagement. I like mailing lists, but the amount of obnoxious 
little netiquette rules are not (and will never be) followed by all but the 
beardiest graybeards. Half the community (half the board members, even) top 
post, use HTML, use their own weird ideas of formatting and commit a number of 
faux pas that mix in chaos to the discussion. Discourse's forum-like web 
interface provides a much saner, human approach for the general populace.

* Providing the opportunity to consolidate needs, such as:
* Polling/Voting [2]
* Community support channels (Fedora replaced their askbot instance with 
Discourse [3])
* Mailing lists: Discourse has a "mailing list mode" - Mozilla's got a nice 
FAQ on how to use it via email [4].

* GDPR compliance tooling is available (not sure how mature it is, but surely 
it's easier than managing mailing lists).

* SAML support [5]

I don't like that the web interface requires JavaScript but that battle was 
lost long ago.

I can see Discourse serving all needs for asynchronous communications while the 
newer Matrix deployment can serve all synchronous communications (Even though 
Slack-style chat promotes pseudo-synchronous hellscapes there needs to be an 
attractive alternative to Telegram). Discourse provides a friendly-enough (if 
ugly/flatly designed) interface to welcome the unwashed but still powerful 
enough for the particulars.

A previous employer of mine used Discourse for internal async communications 
and it worked pretty well for me using mailing list mode/NeoMutt.


[1] https://www.discourse.org/
[2] https://github.com/discourse/discourse-voting
[3] https://ask.fedoraproject.org/
[4] https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/how-do-i-use-discourse-via-email/15279
[5] https://github.com/discourse/discourse-saml


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Telesto]

Op 18-7-2020 om 22:58 schreef Daniel Armando Rodriguez:

El 2020-07-18 12:01, Telesto escribió:

Decidim allows to enrich spaces for participation through multiple
available components (surveys, proposals, follow-up of results,
comments and several more).

-> True; as - I think I said - no experience with all participation
tools.. Did try decidim quickly today.  I personally find
https://try.decidim.org not utmost attractive visually (not judging
the functionality, capability's or scale ability). Another part is a
full fetched participation environment really needed. Or is it rather
overblown functionality nobody actually gonna use. The number of
active commenting users isn't extremely large; and the number
responding here even lower.  Even polls at
https://planet.documentfoundation.org/ attract representative amount
of users. I happy already with kind of comment board showing depth (so
responds too) and a moderation score (the moderation can be done by
anyone logged in at the site). Gray means Off-topic / irrelevant; +3
Spotlight. In addition can a vote be added; to support/unsupported.
And maybe a poll functionality Are more options actually needed? I'm
would be quite happy with forum/ bulletin board with decent comment
functionality and possibly to support a comment and/or prioritizing
comments.

This e-mail message board is not my type of thing. Unstructured, hard
to go through. Bug tracker message system is already a lot better. And
a message board with comments (which easily show who is responding to
what and being able to filter based on votes and or moderation score)
is perfect already. The 'voting'/ supporting should be enough for non
fluent people, I think. And message board maybe even be translated too
by some automatic translation site. Quality is often quite acceptable.
Visa versa people could use a translation side to write their opinion
in native language, while being automatically translated to English
with some  'heading: automatic translation" and the source text below.
That's what I do if there is a posting of a bug in
Spanish/French/German.

And it could environment could be used also on
blog.documentfoundation.org. As I'm talking about message board with
same functionality (except slightly improved comment system). So to
backend or the whole site could shared. Without bloating everything
with again a new environment for participation. Including maintaining
(security updates/ configuration)/ moderating etc. And all the
comments can also send as e-mail message to the e-mail archive if
people like nabble/mailings.


Fair enough,

In my opinion, one cannot always depend on translation tools to say 
something. I usually use them, but many times it is necessary to make 
adjustments to bring the translated text closer to what you really 
want to say.


The case of translating text is different, since even if it is not the 
best result, the idea can be understood.

But that's just my opinion.

In addition, I believe that a full participatory environment is 
necessary. In principle, because it concentrates different tools on a 
single platform.


Regarding the mentions about updates and maintenance, I have already 
expressed my willingness to add my collaboration if necessary.


I also believe that when everyone can feel the benefits of such a 
platform many people will welcome it.


-> Also a truth in that.. I'm also not intending to shoot the idea 
down. Only giving a different vision. It's not black/white. I 
appriciate the initiatif.  I know that translation tools aren't 
perfect, but that issue won't be solved with any community tool (but 
that's pure assumption; without knowing the facts).


-> In addition, I believe that a full participatory environment is 
necessary. In principle, because it concentrates different tools on a 
single platform.
I'm not totally following the argument here. It's start with 
inventaring the use cases (how is it deployed) and the tooling needed 
for those cases. Not seen many cases where participation was useful. 
Mostly everthing flows/ functions without lots of disturbances. 
However, I'm only seeing a side of the departements around 
(QA/UX/Dev). Yes there are some UX arguments which ideally would be 
discussed at participation level  to get more feedback (Autocorrect 
markdown enabled be default). The meeting is always time based with 
not to many attendees and not many people are following the bug feed. 
However not sure if those few cases make a full participatory 
environment needed. If the participatory environment isn't used 
activily or if there is not much to be discussed. Every departement 
does it's job normally. So the instances of interacting rather scarce, 
IMHO. The Marketing Communication Plan is an example where you want to 
give feedback (or I would still be neglected), until it landed in 
Master/RC. I did get a memo I think, but didn't get my attention.


So yes, ideally  a full participatory environment within fit/belong in 
a 

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Daniel Armando Rodriguez]

El 2020-07-18 12:01, Telesto escribió:

Decidim allows to enrich spaces for participation through multiple
available components (surveys, proposals, follow-up of results,
comments and several more).

-> True; as - I think I said - no experience with all participation
tools.. Did try decidim quickly today.  I personally find
https://try.decidim.org not utmost attractive visually (not judging
the functionality, capability's or scale ability). Another part is a
full fetched participation environment really needed. Or is it rather
overblown functionality nobody actually gonna use. The number of
active commenting users isn't extremely large; and the number
responding here even lower.  Even polls at
https://planet.documentfoundation.org/ attract representative amount
of users. I happy already with kind of comment board showing depth (so
responds too) and a moderation score (the moderation can be done by
anyone logged in at the site). Gray means Off-topic / irrelevant; +3
Spotlight. In addition can a vote be added; to support/unsupported.
And maybe a poll functionality Are more options actually needed? I'm
would be quite happy with forum/ bulletin board with decent comment
functionality and possibly to support a comment and/or prioritizing
comments.

This e-mail message board is not my type of thing.  Unstructured, hard
to go through. Bug tracker message system is already a lot better. And
a message board with comments (which easily show who is responding to
what and being able to filter based on votes and or moderation score)
is perfect already. The 'voting'/ supporting should be enough for non
fluent people, I think. And message board maybe even be translated too
by some automatic translation site. Quality is often quite acceptable.
Visa versa people could use a translation side to write their opinion
in native language, while being automatically translated to English
with some  'heading: automatic translation" and the source text below.
That's what I do if there is a posting of a bug in
Spanish/French/German.

And it could environment could be used also on
blog.documentfoundation.org. As I'm talking about message board with
same functionality (except slightly improved comment system). So to
backend or the whole site could shared. Without bloating everything
with again a new environment for participation. Including maintaining
(security updates/ configuration)/ moderating etc. And all the
comments can also send as e-mail message to the e-mail archive if
people like nabble/mailings.


Fair enough,

In my opinion, one cannot always depend on translation tools to say 
something. I usually use them, but many times it is necessary to make 
adjustments to bring the translated text closer to what you really want 
to say.


The case of translating text is different, since even if it is not the 
best result, the idea can be understood.

But that's just my opinion.

In addition, I believe that a full participatory environment is 
necessary. In principle, because it concentrates different tools on a 
single platform.


Regarding the mentions about updates and maintenance, I have already 
expressed my willingness to add my collaboration if necessary.


I also believe that when everyone can feel the benefits of such a 
platform many people will welcome it.




--
DAR

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Telesto]

Decidim allows to enrich spaces for participation through multiple 
available components (surveys, proposals, follow-up of results, comments 
and several more).


-> True; as - I think I said - no experience with all participation 
tools.. Did try decidim quickly today.  I personally find 
https://try.decidim.org not utmost attractive visually (not judging the 
functionality, capability's or scale ability) . Another part is a full 
fetched participation environment really needed. Or is it rather 
overblown functionality nobody actually gonna use. The number of active 
commenting users isn't extremely large; and the number responding here 
even lower.  Even polls at https://planet.documentfoundation.org/ 
attract representative amount of users. I happy already with kind of 
comment board showing depth (so responds too) and a moderation score 
(the moderation can be done by anyone logged in at the site). Gray means 
Off-topic / irrelevant; +3 Spotlight. In addition can a vote be added; 
to support/unsupported. And maybe a poll functionality Are more options 
actually needed? I'm would be quite happy with forum/ bulletin board 
with decent comment functionality and possibly to support a comment 
and/or prioritizing comments.


This e-mail message board is not my type of thing.  Unstructured, hard 
to go through. Bug tracker message system is already a lot better. And a 
message board with comments (which easily show who is responding to what 
and being able to filter based on votes and or moderation score) is 
perfect already. The 'voting'/ supporting should be enough for non 
fluent people, I think. And message board maybe even be translated too 
by some automatic translation site. Quality is often quite acceptable. 
Visa versa people could use a translation side to write their opinion in 
native language, while being automatically translated to English with 
some  'heading: automatic translation" and the source text below. That's 
what I do if there is a posting of a bug in Spanish/French/German.


And it could environment could be used also on 
blog.documentfoundation.org. As I'm talking about message board with 
same functionality (except slightly improved comment system). So to 
backend or the whole site could shared. Without bloating everything with 
again a new environment for participation. Including maintaining 
(security updates/ configuration)/ moderating etc. And all the comments 
can also send as e-mail message to the e-mail archive if people like 
nabble/mailings.



Op 18-7-2020 om 16:08 schreef Daniel Armando Rodriguez:

El 2020-07-17 15:35, Telesto escribió:

Please don't confuse "making voices heard", which is generally good, 
with "offering them a vote", which is generally problematic if they 
do not carry any responsibilities upon which their votes might rely 
and especially if they are willing to vote for ideas they don't fully 
understand on the basis only of personality or identity. Decisions 
made in that way have bad outcomes.


+1 for the above

Sometimes I think, don't make it to to complex.


The intention is completely the opposite

As there number of people contributing to the discussion oversee able. 
So maybe some kind of news article/news board of system;  An 
introduction article [Starting point] + comment system like this (not 
sure how it's called); 
https://tweakers.net/reviews/7694/last/android-11-kleine-verfijningen-zonder-zoete-verrassingen.html#reacties. 
 The starting point can be created by anybody registered. The response 
and the voting makes it easier to keep track of important input 
(read-up) and what people support or not. For tapping into the general 
public I would prefer a a polling system. Some background story [XXX] 
What do you think about Community Edition. Great Idea! Not so, 
because..  [44 characters or maybe few more to keep it short]. If the 
want to give more input they should go you can go to www..


Decidim allows to enrich spaces for participation through multiple 
available components (surveys, proposals, follow-up of results, 
comments and several more).


The ultimately decision should me made at the board.  The community 
tools intended to gather input (and should communicated this way).


As Sophi said, "this is not about offering to vote (which can be 
disabled in Decidim) but about providing a support to a comment. It's 
very different because that allows people not fluent in English to 
give an educated opinion and partipate. It's easy when you're fluent 
to express yourself, and it takes hours to one who is not, most of the 
time he will abandon before."








--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Daniel Armando Rodriguez]

El 2020-07-17 15:35, Telesto escribió:

Please don't confuse "making voices heard", which is generally good, 
with "offering them a vote", which is generally problematic if they do 
not carry any responsibilities upon which their votes might rely and 
especially if they are willing to vote for ideas they don't fully 
understand on the basis only of personality or identity. Decisions made 
in that way have bad outcomes.


+1 for the above

Sometimes I think, don't make it to to complex.


The intention is completely the opposite

As there number of people contributing to the discussion oversee able. 
So maybe some kind of news article/news board of system;  An 
introduction article [Starting point] + comment system like this (not 
sure how it's called); 
https://tweakers.net/reviews/7694/last/android-11-kleine-verfijningen-zonder-zoete-verrassingen.html#reacties. 
 The starting point can be created by anybody registered. The response 
and the voting makes it easier to keep track of important input 
(read-up) and what people support or not. For tapping into the general 
public I would prefer a a polling system. Some background story [XXX] 
What do you think about Community Edition. Great Idea! Not so, because.. 
 [44 characters or maybe few more to keep it short]. If the want to give 
more input they should go you can go to www..


Decidim allows to enrich spaces for participation through multiple 
available components (surveys, proposals, follow-up of results, comments 
and several more).


The ultimately decision should me made at the board.  The community 
tools intended to gather input (and should communicated this way).


As Sophi said, "this is not about offering to vote (which can be 
disabled in Decidim) but about providing a support to a comment. It's 
very different because that allows people not fluent in English to give 
an educated opinion and partipate. It's easy when you're fluent to 
express yourself, and it takes hours to one who is not, most of the time 
he will abandon before."





--
DAR

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Telesto]

Please don't confuse "making voices heard", which is generally good, 
with "offering them a vote", which is generally problematic if they do 
not carry any responsibilities upon which their votes might rely and 
especially if they are willing to vote for ideas they don't fully 
understand on the basis only of personality or identity. Decisions made 
in that way have bad outcomes.


+1 for the above

Sometimes I think, don't make it to to complex. As there number of 
people contributing to the discussion oversee able. So maybe some kind 
of news article/news board of system;  An introduction article [Starting 
point] + comment system like this (not sure how it's called); 
https://tweakers.net/reviews/7694/last/android-11-kleine-verfijningen-zonder-zoete-verrassingen.html#reacties. 
The starting point can be created by anybody registered. The response 
and the voting makes it easier to keep track of important input 
(read-up) and what people support or not. For tapping into the general 
public I would prefer a a polling system. Some background story [XXX] 
What do you think about Community Edition. Great Idea! Not so, 
because..  [44 characters or maybe few more to keep it short]. If the 
want to give more input they should go you can go to www..


The ultimately decision should me made at the board.  The community 
tools intended to gather input (and should communicated this way). Note: 
still having issues managing the topic flow. The topic evolved more or 
less from 'Personal edition' to "Community edition". Where a group 
lagging still responded to 'Personal Edition' while I got the feeling 
that we moved on already. Another issue is managing people like me, 
chaotic thinkers. After the Commodity Edition /Enterprise it started I 
to question the Edition (which I initially supported). With next step 
objecting against Edition terminology within the current context. And 
I'm surely having issues to 'grasp' the positions. What I needs to 
clarified.


Telesto

Op 17-7-2020 om 19:32 schreef Simon Phipps:




On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 6:19 PM Daniel Armando Rodriguez 
> wrote:


El 2020-07-17 13:20, Simon Phipps escribió:
> There is also CONSUL, which was developed as open source by
Madrid City
> Council, transferred to an independent Foundation and is now used
> worldwide. Italo Vignoli is a member of their Board of
Directors. See
> https://consulproject.org/en/
>
> All the same, I don't think it's necessarily a good thing to bring
> thousands of voters into a decision making process where they
have no
> responsibilities to moderate their exercise of rights. It will just
> become factional and partisan based on external agendas.

I believe that it is crucially important to allow as many voices as
possible to be heard, and the consequent monitoring process is
greatly
facilitated by the implementation of a tool such as Decidim so,
together
BoD & Community can decide about the issues that matter to us.


Please don't confuse "making voices heard", which is generally good, 
with "offering them a vote", which is generally problematic if they do 
not carry any responsibilities upon which their votes might rely and 
especially if they are willing to vote for ideas they don't fully 
understand on the basis only of personality or identity. Decisions 
made in that way have bad outcomes.


S.
--
*Simon Phipps*
/Meshed Insights Ltd/

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Daniel Armando Rodriguez]

El 2020-07-17 15:05, Michael Meeks escribió:

On 17/07/2020 18:52, Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote:

Well, misunderstanding of ideas can be avoided simply by communicating
in such a way that no aspect is taken for granted when making the
request for feedback.


	I have no problem with tools to get polls / feedback from our 
userbase;

that's great =)

	Of course, for decisions - we are a meritocracy^W doers-decide 
project;
so having some separate means for the members to easily inform the 
board

/ discuss and/or give their input / views on things would also be
extremely valuable. Hopefully some clear separation would make
membership - and more importantly the contribution necessary to achieve
it more attractive to people too (perhaps).

My 2 cents,



Well, the membership base is small enough (221 to date) to condition 
feedback to that group only.


Ideas can add up, grow and take shape with a wider audience. That is the 
spirit behind the initiative.





--
DAR

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Michael Meeks]

On 17/07/2020 18:52, Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote:
> Well, misunderstanding of ideas can be avoided simply by communicating
> in such a way that no aspect is taken for granted when making the
> request for feedback.

I have no problem with tools to get polls / feedback from our userbase;
that's great =)

Of course, for decisions - we are a meritocracy^W doers-decide project;
so having some separate means for the members to easily inform the board
/ discuss and/or give their input / views on things would also be
extremely valuable. Hopefully some clear separation would make
membership - and more importantly the contribution necessary to achieve
it more attractive to people too (perhaps).

My 2 cents,

Michael.

-- 
michael.me...@collabora.com <><, GM Collabora Productivity
Hangout: mejme...@gmail.com, Skype: mmeeks
(M) +44 7795 666 147 - timezone usually UK / Europe

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Daniel Armando Rodriguez]

El 2020-07-17 15:02, Sophie escribió:

Le 17 juillet 2020 19:32:11 GMT+02:00, Simon Phipps
 a écrit :

On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 6:19 PM Daniel Armando Rodriguez <
drodrig...@documentfoundation.org> wrote:


El 2020-07-17 13:20, Simon Phipps escribió:
> There is also CONSUL, which was developed as open source by Madrid

City

> Council, transferred to an independent Foundation and is now used
> worldwide. Italo Vignoli is a member of their Board of Directors.

See

> https://consulproject.org/en/
>
> All the same, I don't think it's necessarily a good thing to bring
> thousands of voters into a decision making process where they have

no

> responsibilities to moderate their exercise of rights. It will just
> become factional and partisan based on external agendas.

I believe that it is crucially important to allow as many voices as
possible to be heard, and the consequent monitoring process is

greatly

facilitated by the implementation of a tool such as Decidim so,

together

BoD & Community can decide about the issues that matter to us.



Please don't confuse "making voices heard", which is generally good,
with
"offering them a vote", which is generally problematic if they do not
carry
any responsibilities upon which their votes might rely and especially
if
they are willing to vote for ideas they don't fully understand on the
basis
only of personality or identity. Decisions made in that way have bad
outcomes.


This is not about offering to vote (wich can be disabled in Decidim
which I know better than other tools) but about providing a support to
a comment. It's very different because that allows people not fluent
in English to give an educated opinion and partipate. It's easy when
you're fluent to express yourself, and it takes hours to one who is
not, most of the time he will abandon before.


+100 :-D




--
DAR

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Sophie]

Le 17 juillet 2020 19:32:11 GMT+02:00, Simon Phipps  a écrit 
:
>On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 6:19 PM Daniel Armando Rodriguez <
>drodrig...@documentfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> El 2020-07-17 13:20, Simon Phipps escribió:
>> > There is also CONSUL, which was developed as open source by Madrid
>City
>> > Council, transferred to an independent Foundation and is now used
>> > worldwide. Italo Vignoli is a member of their Board of Directors.
>See
>> > https://consulproject.org/en/
>> >
>> > All the same, I don't think it's necessarily a good thing to bring
>> > thousands of voters into a decision making process where they have
>no
>> > responsibilities to moderate their exercise of rights. It will just
>> > become factional and partisan based on external agendas.
>>
>> I believe that it is crucially important to allow as many voices as
>> possible to be heard, and the consequent monitoring process is
>greatly
>> facilitated by the implementation of a tool such as Decidim so,
>together
>> BoD & Community can decide about the issues that matter to us.
>>
>
>Please don't confuse "making voices heard", which is generally good,
>with
>"offering them a vote", which is generally problematic if they do not
>carry
>any responsibilities upon which their votes might rely and especially
>if
>they are willing to vote for ideas they don't fully understand on the
>basis
>only of personality or identity. Decisions made in that way have bad
>outcomes.

This is not about offering to vote (wich can be disabled in Decidim which I 
know better than other tools) but about providing a support to a comment. It's 
very different because that allows people not fluent in English to give an 
educated opinion and partipate. It's easy when you're fluent to express 
yourself, and it takes hours to one who is not, most of the time he will 
abandon before.
Cheers
Sophie


--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Daniel Armando Rodriguez]

El 2020-07-17 14:32, Simon Phipps escribió:

On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 6:19 PM Daniel Armando Rodriguez 
 wrote:



El 2020-07-17 13:20, Simon Phipps escribió:
There is also CONSUL, which was developed as open source by Madrid 
City

Council, transferred to an independent Foundation and is now used
worldwide. Italo Vignoli is a member of their Board of Directors. See
https://consulproject.org/en/

All the same, I don't think it's necessarily a good thing to bring
thousands of voters into a decision making process where they have no
responsibilities to moderate their exercise of rights. It will just
become factional and partisan based on external agendas.


I believe that it is crucially important to allow as many voices as
possible to be heard, and the consequent monitoring process is greatly
facilitated by the implementation of a tool such as Decidim so, 
together

BoD & Community can decide about the issues that matter to us.


Please don't confuse "making voices heard", which is generally good, 
with "offering them a vote", which is generally problematic if they do 
not carry any responsibilities upon which their votes might rely and 
especially if they are willing to vote for ideas they don't fully 
understand on the basis only of personality or identity. Decisions made 
in that way have bad outcomes.


Well, misunderstanding of ideas can be avoided simply by communicating 
in such a way that no aspect is taken for granted when making the 
request for feedback.




--
DAR

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Simon Phipps]

On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 6:19 PM Daniel Armando Rodriguez <
drodrig...@documentfoundation.org> wrote:

> El 2020-07-17 13:20, Simon Phipps escribió:
> > There is also CONSUL, which was developed as open source by Madrid City
> > Council, transferred to an independent Foundation and is now used
> > worldwide. Italo Vignoli is a member of their Board of Directors. See
> > https://consulproject.org/en/
> >
> > All the same, I don't think it's necessarily a good thing to bring
> > thousands of voters into a decision making process where they have no
> > responsibilities to moderate their exercise of rights. It will just
> > become factional and partisan based on external agendas.
>
> I believe that it is crucially important to allow as many voices as
> possible to be heard, and the consequent monitoring process is greatly
> facilitated by the implementation of a tool such as Decidim so, together
> BoD & Community can decide about the issues that matter to us.
>

Please don't confuse "making voices heard", which is generally good, with
"offering them a vote", which is generally problematic if they do not carry
any responsibilities upon which their votes might rely and especially if
they are willing to vote for ideas they don't fully understand on the basis
only of personality or identity. Decisions made in that way have bad
outcomes.

S.
-- 
*Simon Phipps*
*Meshed Insights Ltd*

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Daniel Armando Rodriguez]

El 2020-07-17 13:20, Simon Phipps escribió:


On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 5:03 PM Kev M  wrote:

There are other participatory democracy software out there that exist 
but I don't know many that are Open Source.


There is also CONSUL, which was developed as open source by Madrid City 
Council, transferred to an independent Foundation and is now used 
worldwide. Italo Vignoli is a member of their Board of Directors. See 
https://consulproject.org/en/


All the same, I don't think it's necessarily a good thing to bring 
thousands of voters into a decision making process where they have no 
responsibilities to moderate their exercise of rights. It will just 
become factional and partisan based on external agendas.


I believe that it is crucially important to allow as many voices as 
possible to be heard, and the consequent monitoring process is greatly 
facilitated by the implementation of a tool such as Decidim so, together 
BoD & Community can decide about the issues that matter to us.




--
DAR

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Simon Phipps]

On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 5:03 PM Kev M  wrote:

>
> There are other participatory democracy software out there that exist but
> I don't know many that are Open Source.
>

There is also CONSUL, which was developed as open source by Madrid City
Council, transferred to an independent Foundation and is now used
worldwide. Italo Vignoli is a member of their Board of Directors. See
https://consulproject.org/en/

All the same, I don't think it's necessarily a good thing to bring
thousands of voters into a decision making process where they have no
responsibilities to moderate their exercise of rights. It will just become
factional and partisan based on external agendas.

S.
-- 
*Simon Phipps*
*Meshed Insights Ltd*

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Kev M]

If democraciaOS is not available/up to date I would suggest investigating 
https://www.loomio.org/ - They are open source under the GPL-license.

There are other participatory democracy software out there that exist but I 
don't know many that are Open Source.

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Daniel Armando Rodriguez]

El 2020-07-17 11:42, Cor Nouws escribió:

Hi Daniel, *,

Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote on 17/07/2020 15:11:
As stated at the meeting, the number of subscribers to the mailing 
lists

is significantly low. The user list, for example, has about 1500
subscribers, the Spanish and Brazilian lists have about 350 people 
each.

TDF has today 221 members and this list only 160 people. Therefore,
beyond the fact that the subscription is voluntary, it cannot be said
that many people are encouraged to participate in the discussions.


It is indeed right that mailing lists are not for _all_ - any more.
/me those were good times ;)


It has to do with a social issue, as someone said, but also with the
language barrier and the ability to argue an idea. And I'm pretty sure
that providing a platform where people can vote on comments/ideas will
allow TDF to attract much more participation, even from those who 
don't

speak English as fluently... as I do.


Of course it is not needed to get votes in the first place, but 
allowing
people to provide input, without the need to set up an email address 
for

that, is indeed important.


To make it clear, this is not an attempt to solve several problems at
once, I don't expect to present a final solution, if there is one. But


I heard a likewise comment in the BoD meeting indeed, and could not 
well

understand it myself.
Maybe the idea was to express that the problem is a complex one, and 
not

only solved by different tooling. Maybe the tooling even is less
important than an attitude that encourages participation.
I remember quite some moments from the past, that on a mailing lists, 
in

a discussion, or at the start of it, it was recognized that we should
try to use more public lists for the kind of topics.. Sometimes that
worked. But to often, with the load of work, difficulty to manage,
moderate (more widely) discussions etc. we fell in old habits.. ;)


as a foundation with a global reach we need to make people willing to
participate. If such behavior modification is achieved through 
technical

change, then we welcome it.


Indeed. Technical means can help.
If a mailing list was available for all, one could say that it would be
sufficient to announce on all channels that discussion.topic is ongoing
there to encourage people to join - if they so wish.
And of course that applies to any preferred tool: make sure that people
in other channels get a ping to make them aware.


Once implemented, of course an invitation will send through all the 
channels

to let people give it a try. I'm thinking in a blog post also.


What I propose is to give the platform a chance without leaving any
other tools aside, for a certain period of time, and then evaluate the
performance.


I did not look into details of https://democraciaos.org/en/


Well, unfortunately DemocracyOS is currently without maintenance. So the 
preferred choice is decidim, which is a most complete and powerfull 
tool.



But I have a high trust in open source and tooling developed to support
democracy. So, with only the condition that it allows to have (some)
interaction with mail (and I guess it has), I'm much in favor to give 
it

a try!


Indeed, notifications are send through email


Maybe with a few projects, topics to start with - not do a complete
remake of our work immediately - it yields good experience.


Of course

And imagine it makes it even easier to improve our attitudes at the 
same time :)







--
DAR

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Daniel Armando Rodriguez]

El 2020-07-17 11:12, Thorsten Behrens escribió:

Hi Franklin, all,

Franklin Weng wrote:

BTW, even if it becomes 15th useless channel, which can be tweaked,
tried and improved from the running experiences, it will not be a
big deal IMO.


Sure, it would create more silos & further fracture the community.

As I said during the board call - this is lovely technology, that I
can imagine we can put to good use, for some areas.

But it doesn't solve the 'too many channels' problem (as it was
advertised to do). Let's not fool ourselves.

Unless we're willing to shut down mailing lists & telegram channels,
and actively shepherd community members over.


We have to show the community the usefulness of the platform. We can't 
make use mandatory, that doesn't work.


I already commented on the numbers related to the number of subscribers 
that have some mailing lists, and such numbers are not representative of 
the whole community IMO.





--
DAR

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Cor Nouws]

Hi Daniel, *,

Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote on 17/07/2020 15:11:
> As stated at the meeting, the number of subscribers to the mailing lists
> is significantly low. The user list, for example, has about 1500
> subscribers, the Spanish and Brazilian lists have about 350 people each.
> TDF has today 221 members and this list only 160 people. Therefore,
> beyond the fact that the subscription is voluntary, it cannot be said
> that many people are encouraged to participate in the discussions.

It is indeed right that mailing lists are not for _all_ - any more.
/me those were good times ;)

> It has to do with a social issue, as someone said, but also with the
> language barrier and the ability to argue an idea. And I'm pretty sure
> that providing a platform where people can vote on comments/ideas will
> allow TDF to attract much more participation, even from those who don't
> speak English as fluently... as I do.

Of course it is not needed to get votes in the first place, but allowing
people to provide input, without the need to set up an email address for
that, is indeed important.

> To make it clear, this is not an attempt to solve several problems at
> once, I don't expect to present a final solution, if there is one. But

I heard a likewise comment in the BoD meeting indeed, and could not well
understand it myself.
Maybe the idea was to express that the problem is a complex one, and not
only solved by different tooling. Maybe the tooling even is less
important than an attitude that encourages participation.
I remember quite some moments from the past, that on a mailing lists, in
a discussion, or at the start of it, it was recognized that we should
try to use more public lists for the kind of topics.. Sometimes that
worked. But to often, with the load of work, difficulty to manage,
moderate (more widely) discussions etc. we fell in old habits.. ;)

> as a foundation with a global reach we need to make people willing to
> participate. If such behavior modification is achieved through technical
> change, then we welcome it.

Indeed. Technical means can help.
If a mailing list was available for all, one could say that it would be
sufficient to announce on all channels that discussion.topic is ongoing
there to encourage people to join - if they so wish.
And of course that applies to any preferred tool: make sure that people
in other channels get a ping to make them aware.

> What I propose is to give the platform a chance without leaving any
> other tools aside, for a certain period of time, and then evaluate the
> performance.

I did not look into details of https://democraciaos.org/en/
But I have a high trust in open source and tooling developed to support
democracy. So, with only the condition that it allows to have (some)
interaction with mail (and I guess it has), I'm much in favor to give it
a try!
Maybe with a few projects, topics to start with - not do a complete
remake of our work immediately - it yields good experience. And imagine
it makes it even easier to improve our attitudes at the same time :)

So yes. Thanks!

Cor



-- 
Cor Nouws, member Board of Directors
The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin
Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details: http://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint

GPD key ID: 0xB13480A6 - 591A 30A7 36A0 CE3C 3D28  A038 E49D 7365 B134 80A6
mobile  : +31 (0)6 25 20 7001
skype   : cornouws
blog: cor4office-nl.blogspot.com
jabber  : cor4off...@jabber.org


-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Thorsten Behrens]

Hi Franklin, all,

Franklin Weng wrote:
> BTW, even if it becomes 15th useless channel, which can be tweaked,
> tried and improved from the running experiences, it will not be a
> big deal IMO.
>
Sure, it would create more silos & further fracture the community.

As I said during the board call - this is lovely technology, that I
can imagine we can put to good use, for some areas.

But it doesn't solve the 'too many channels' problem (as it was
advertised to do). Let's not fool ourselves.

Unless we're willing to shut down mailing lists & telegram channels,
and actively shepherd community members over.

Cheers,

-- Thorsten


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Daniel Armando Rodriguez]

As stated at the meeting, the number of subscribers to the mailing lists 
is significantly low. The user list, for example, has about 1500 
subscribers, the Spanish and Brazilian lists have about 350 people each. 
TDF has today 221 members and this list only 160 people. Therefore, 
beyond the fact that the subscription is voluntary, it cannot be said 
that many people are encouraged to participate in the discussions.


It has to do with a social issue, as someone said, but also with the 
language barrier and the ability to argue an idea. And I'm pretty sure 
that providing a platform where people can vote on comments/ideas will 
allow TDF to attract much more participation, even from those who don't 
speak English as fluently... as I do.


To make it clear, this is not an attempt to solve several problems at 
once, I don't expect to present a final solution, if there is one. But 
as a foundation with a global reach we need to make people willing to 
participate. If such behavior modification is achieved through technical 
change, then we welcome it.


What I propose is to give the platform a chance without leaving any 
other tools aside, for a certain period of time, and then evaluate the 
performance.









--
Daniel Armando Rodriguez, Member of the Board of Directors
The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE
Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[sophi]

Hi,
Le 09/07/2020 à 16:03, Daniel Armando Rodriguez a écrit :
> El 2020-07-09 06:05, Ilmari Lauhakangas escribió:
>> Thorsten Behrens kirjoitti 9.7.2020 klo 11.44:
>>> Ilmari Lauhakangas wrote:
 DemocracyOS vs. anything we currently have is an apples to oranges
 comparison meaning we *can't* shut anything down.

>>> But how would DemocracyOS then help to solve the too-many-channels
>>> problem?
>>
>> In my view it would not help solve that specific problem. I guess the
>> idea was instead to have a channel geared towards a very specific
>> purpose (feedback to TDF governance) with an interface that would be
>> pleasant for the majority.
> 
> Ilmari did the reading I was aiming at.
> 
> One example, spanish ML has 329 subscribers so far. Takign just the 1%
> of the spanish speaking people worldwide, which is about 500 millions,
> that number is not even insignificant.
> 
> That's the main reason that motivates me, to bring new users closer
> through a channel more in tune with the current times and, therefore,
> something that most computer users are used to.

I agree, and by the way, it's not yet another communication channel as
some may see it, it's a participative platform to collect feedback from
large groups in an organized way either by comments, supports or votesœ.
Decision takers spend less time to analyze and sort the feedback
provided than on mailing lists. For a project of our size, I feel it's
also needed to have participatory mechanisms that are welcoming to NLPs
too and civic technologies are an answer to that.
Thorsten, I understand your fears that the communication may spread over
another tool, but it's a matter of education and contributors will
quickly see the advantages of using it instead of posting on Telegram,
BZ or mailing lists because it's exactly done for governance. It's also
a way to value their feedback by having a mean to support it.

Cheers
Sophie

-- 
Sophie Gautier so...@libreoffice.org
GSM: +33683901545
IRC: sophi
Foundation coordinator
The Document Foundation

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Nicolas Christener]

Hi all

On Thu, 2020-07-09 at 01:51 +0200, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
[...]
> One comment:
> 
> - I'd strongly suggest that any new tool we introduce comes with a
>   commitment to shutdown / discourage at least one (but better more!)
>   existing tool. We'll otherwise quickly get to https://xkcd.com/927/ ;)
> 
> So if https://democraciaos.org/ is to solve the
> too-many-communication-channels problem - are we then shutting down
> IRC/Telegram, or even the mailing lists?

IMHO IRC/Telegram and mailing lists have different aims. One is for "instant
communication" the other is for "more complex discussions". 

I love mailing lists and was quite "shocked", when other big F/OSS projects
started to move away (see for example [0]). However at some point I realized,
that the hurdles to participate in discussion on mailing lists are indeed too
high([1]) for many people. I'm not sure if killing all mailing lists is what I
would propose - but why not discussing to move most of the "non developer"
lists to something like discourse (and migrate AskBot as well)?

Some half-baked thoughts:
* Talk to e.g. the Gnome folks about their experience regarding Discourse
* Discuss a migration of AskBot to tool xyz
  -> could be Discourse or whatever people like
* Discuss migrating a set of mailinglists to the same tool

Thoughts?

[0] https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2019-February/msg1.html
[1] Younger people don't have an e-mail address anymore, signing up requires
too man steps, spam is an issue, most people don't know how to quote
mails, etc.

All the best,
Nicolas

-- 
Nicolas Christener, Deputy Member of the Board of Directors
The Document Foundation, Kurfürstendamm 188, 10707 Berlin, DE
Gemeinnützige rechtsfähige Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
Legal details: https://www.documentfoundation.org/imprint


-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Daniel Armando Rodriguez]

El 2020-07-09 06:05, Ilmari Lauhakangas escribió:

Thorsten Behrens kirjoitti 9.7.2020 klo 11.44:

Ilmari Lauhakangas wrote:

DemocracyOS vs. anything we currently have is an apples to oranges
comparison meaning we *can't* shut anything down.

But how would DemocracyOS then help to solve the too-many-channels 
problem?


In my view it would not help solve that specific problem. I guess the
idea was instead to have a channel geared towards a very specific
purpose (feedback to TDF governance) with an interface that would be
pleasant for the majority.


Ilmari did the reading I was aiming at.

One example, spanish ML has 329 subscribers so far. Takign just the 1% 
of the spanish speaking people worldwide, which is about 500 millions, 
that number is not even insignificant.


That's the main reason that motivates me, to bring new users closer 
through a channel more in tune with the current times and, therefore, 
something that most computer users are used to.





--
DAR

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Ilmari Lauhakangas]

Thorsten Behrens kirjoitti 9.7.2020 klo 11.44:

Ilmari Lauhakangas wrote:

DemocracyOS vs. anything we currently have is an apples to oranges
comparison meaning we *can't* shut anything down.


But how would DemocracyOS then help to solve the too-many-channels problem?


In my view it would not help solve that specific problem. I guess the 
idea was instead to have a channel geared towards a very specific 
purpose (feedback to TDF governance) with an interface that would be 
pleasant for the majority.


Ilmari

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [libreoffice-website] Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Thorsten Behrens]

Ilmari Lauhakangas wrote:
> DemocracyOS vs. anything we currently have is an apples to oranges
> comparison meaning we *can't* shut anything down.
> 
But how would DemocracyOS then help to solve the too-many-channels problem?

Cheers,

-- Thorsten


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Ilmari Lauhakangas]

Thorsten Behrens kirjoitti 9.7.2020 klo 2.51:

Hi Daniel,

[sry for the repetition, missed this public mail initially]

Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote:

In my opinion, and based on recent experience, I consider it necessary for
TDF to be open to community participation in a more modern and accessible
way to everyone.


I agree. The recent discussions where spread across a lot of places.


In this sense, it is clear that the use of mailing lists, IRC/Telegram
channels does not allow to reach the majority of LibreOffice users, free
software advocates and community members and that is why I would like to
propose the adoption of a platform that favours participation, debate,
interaction and collaborative elaboration of lines of action between TDF and
the community.


One comment:

- I'd strongly suggest that any new tool we introduce comes with a
   commitment to shutdown / discourage at least one (but better more!)
   existing tool. We'll otherwise quickly get to https://xkcd.com/927/ ;)

So if https://democraciaos.org/ is to solve the
too-many-communication-channels problem - are we then shutting down
IRC/Telegram, or even the mailing lists?


Please also take into consideration that we intend to replace AskBot 
with a forum.


DemocracyOS vs. anything we currently have is an apples to oranges 
comparison meaning we *can't* shut anything down.


Ilmari

--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: board-discuss+unsubscr...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: https://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/
Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

[Thorsten Behrens]

Hi Daniel,

[sry for the repetition, missed this public mail initially]

Daniel Armando Rodriguez wrote:
> In my opinion, and based on recent experience, I consider it necessary for
> TDF to be open to community participation in a more modern and accessible
> way to everyone.
> 
I agree. The recent discussions where spread across a lot of places.

> In this sense, it is clear that the use of mailing lists, IRC/Telegram
> channels does not allow to reach the majority of LibreOffice users, free
> software advocates and community members and that is why I would like to
> propose the adoption of a platform that favours participation, debate,
> interaction and collaborative elaboration of lines of action between TDF and
> the community.
> 
One comment:

- I'd strongly suggest that any new tool we introduce comes with a
  commitment to shutdown / discourage at least one (but better more!)
  existing tool. We'll otherwise quickly get to https://xkcd.com/927/ ;)

So if https://democraciaos.org/ is to solve the
too-many-communication-channels problem - are we then shutting down
IRC/Telegram, or even the mailing lists?

Cheers,

-- Thorsten


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature