On 03/24/2016 03:52 AM, mray wrote:
> During the last meeting with iko and chreekat we compiled the list of
> pages that seem to be needed for MVP:
>
> @Michael:
>
>
> welcome
> /about (the project organization for newcomers: team, contact info, etc)
as long as the about page links to all appropriate stuff so that people
can get from there to wherever we have important content…
> /dashboard (overview and status of pledges and balance)
sure
> /login
> /logout
> /create-account
> /change-passphrase
> /reset-passphrase
> /set-passphrase
I thought we would have an "auth" subsite, and so just to clarify, I
don't have any real opinion, and it's not my area, but did we want the
login and passphrase stuff to be all under /auth/ ? Or is that more just
a backend aspect that won't be presented in terms of the url?
> /terms
> /privacy
> /trademarks
> /how-it-works
> /sponsors
> /p
> /p/snowdrift
> /honor-pledge (replaced with wiki link)
The honor pledge is a separate interaction-design issue. I don't insist
but do like the idea of it being included. Linking to wiki is not the
same as an interactive acceptance of the pledge. However, the point of
the pledge is largely in relation to communication and so relates to
wherever we have communication tools… there is a real tension with all
this in that we don't have clarity right now about how we will manage
moderation in our communication areas during MVP etc. I very much miss
having the actual integration that we'd built with our discussion system.
I don't want to see the value of the design we had be disregarded here.
So, I'm really only okay with pushing it to a side etc. if we make it
clear that it's a compromise for now in order to focus on MVP and that
we keep it presented clearly that we still prioritize this and will work
to figure out our eventual integration.
The Code of Conduct *may* be as or more important than the honor-pledge
in terms of making things clear. This topic in general needs more
discussion.
> /js-licenses (replaced by link to license text file in gitlab repo)
>
The point of js-licenses is not just to be human-readable but to be
recognized by LibreJS. It's only okay to change this into some sort of
link if LibreJS still works.
>
> we also concluded that those pages would *not* be needed for MVP:
>
> /u
> /u/#user
> /about/contact
> /about/team
> /about/press
These about pages are only okay to remove from MVP if there are at least
links to the info or it is at /about at the top level. I'm not convinced
that removing the separate pages is helpful in any way. I definitely
think people will expect to see things like a standard link for
"contact" and that we need to have such a link, whether it goes to just
/about or /about#contact vs /contact or /about/contact (my personal
preference would be /contact actually)
> /transactions
> /pledges
> /how-it-works/sustainable-funding
> /how-it-works/co-op
> /how-it-works/network-effect
> /how-it-works/flo
we can avoid these internal how-it-works pages only if the main
/how-it-works page includes links for more reading that goes to the wiki
or something.
> /donate
I'm only okay with leaving out the /donate page for the full MVP where
we are accepting actual funds and have that all clear. Also, to be
blunt, it creates substantial extra tension on the way toward MVP to not
have financial support right now. I haven't emphasized this as much as I
should, but our struggling financial situation right now is a real issue
that shouldn't be downplayed. So, we will need to balance these things.
We don't want to encourage donation separately when people can instead
pledge, but if someone wants to give us a large grant (different from a
modest donation), I want to do all we can to encourage that. These
things could be make-or-break significance potentially.
> /honor-pledge (replaced with wiki link)
you just said above that /honor-pledge *would* be in the MVP (i.e. you
listed it in both sections)
> /merchandise
Hesitant to lose this, not sure removing it is positive, but I'm okay at
least putting off the decision. Merchandise is rivalrous so not
competing directly as a concept versus the regular pledge
> /search
> /js-licenses (replaced by link to license text file in gitlab repo)
>
like honor-pledge, js-licenses was listed above already (in both keep
and remove), and as I said above, the purpose is to be LibreJS
compatible. The MVP should stay LibreJS compatible. It's not that much
work. Don't deprecate that unless there's some reason to do so.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design
