Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] TrinkGeld: Early proposal for a desktop donation app

On Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Alyssa Rosenzweig wrote: Marten's pitch was to get donation links included into package managers, which is a notable innovation I see in TrinkGeld, regardless of whether it has other issues. As in $ apt donate inkscape "$50" or

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] TrinkGeld: Early proposal for a desktop donation app

On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 6:34 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote: On 09/06/2017 07:10 AM, David Seaward wrote: Hi all, Saw this still-very-early-days proposal at https://www.joaquimrocha.com/2017/09/05/paying-for-foss-apps/ "TrinkGeld is a proposal for a GNOME project (but should

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Let's talk about the mechanism

Good catch; I just read the local time and went with that but they are indeed inconsistent. I'll be online shortly and around for most of them, I think. On December 23, 2016 7:14:50 AM EST, Jason Harrer wrote: >> >> >> Would anyone be able to meet tomorrow morning at

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Let's talk about the mechanism

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Stephen Michel <stephen.mic...@tufts.edu> wrote: On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Bryan Richter <br...@snowdrift.coop> wrote: Now that the reboot of the site is operational, I think it's time to start at the top and work our way down to our next imm

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Development status

Hi Rosario, Thank you for caring enough to write in. I volunteered a bunch of time (mostly this past spring) doing project management and design; I'm currently slightly out of the loop (the semester is in full swing). That is to say, Aaron is much closer to the project than I am. I just want

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] How to manage fees for first real-money operations

On Fri, Oct 7, 2016 at 12:44 AM, Bryan Richter wrote: On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 06:46:10PM -0700, Aaron Wolf wrote: First, the premise: As a financial system trying to get people focused on how public goods actually work and are actually funded, we don't want fees

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Michael Siepmann wrote: On 09/20/2016 08:40 AM, Aaron Wolf wrote: On 09/20/2016 01:04 AM, mray wrote: On 20.09.2016 02:25, David Thomas wrote: What about dropping "fund"? "Crowdmatching for public goods" What about dropping "for"?

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Now Gitlab has kanban :)

I agree. 2017 at the earliest. I set myself a reminder to look into this on January 1st. On August 31, 2016 9:04:49 AM EDT, Bryan Richter wrote: >https://about.gitlab.com/2016/08/22/announcing-the-gitlab-issue-board > >https://git.snowdrift.coop/sd/snowdrift/board > >I

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] How the limit works

On August 31, 2016 6:38:46 AM EDT, Bryan Richter <br...@snowdrift.coop> wrote: >On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 10:03:38AM -0400, Stephen Michel wrote: >> >> On August 20, 2016 8:27:09 AM EDT, mray <m...@mray.de> wrote: >> > >> >On 16.08.2016 00:03, Aaron W

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] How the limit works

On August 20, 2016 8:27:09 AM EDT, mray wrote: > > >On 16.08.2016 00:03, Aaron Wolf wrote: >> On 08/10/2016 01:27 AM, mray wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 09.08.2016 22:43, Aaron Wolf wrote: On 08/09/2016 12:59 PM, Bryan Richter wrote: >> Also, I strongly support displaying it

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] How the limit works

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 8:19 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote: -snip- Though I don't think it's the best, I'm satisfied with this plan for MVP. ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] How the limit works

Paraphrasing all my quotes because context is way too long already. mray said: Having a rollover cause unmatching is an extreme edge case If that's true, going over your limit from a rollover is an extreme edge case, too. I think this is an edge case, but not an extreme one. If my limit is

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] How the limit works

On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Aaron Wolf <aa...@snowdrift.coop> wrote: On 08/03/2016 03:29 PM, Stephen Michel wrote: Clean slate because context is getting absurd and this is important regardless of rollover mechanism. What happens if someone wants to set their limit lowe

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] How the limit works

Clean slate because context is getting absurd and this is important regardless of rollover mechanism. What happens if someone wants to set their limit lower than the minimum credit card charge? ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] How the limit works

On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote: On 08/02/2016 05:58 PM, James Sheldon wrote: When are transaction fees charged? When you add money or when it is assigned to a project? This is assuming a charge-in-arrears approach where we avoid holding money which

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] How the limit works

On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 8:05 PM, mray wrote: During the last meeting we discussed details about how the limit works. I just want to voice my opinion on how the limit should work: I strongly believe we should make the limit sacrosanct and not touch it *never ever*. A decision by

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] UX questions for password reset

On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:11 PM, Michael Siepmann <m...@techdesignpsych.com> wrote: On 06/04/2016 06:56 AM, Stephen Michel wrote: On June 4, 2016 5:21:31 AM EDT, mray <m...@mray.de> wrote: On 04.06.2016 08:35, Karl Ove Hufthammer wrote: Bryan Richter skreiv 04. jun

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] UX questions for password reset

On June 4, 2016 5:21:31 AM EDT, mray wrote: > > >On 04.06.2016 08:35, Karl Ove Hufthammer wrote: >> Bryan Richter skreiv 04. juni 2016 03:47: >>> There are two situations where I'm not sure what the best action is. >> >> IMO, the best solution (in both cases) is to *not* reveal

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Let's take care of the blog

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 12:59 AM, Bryan Richter wrote: On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 09:22:46PM -0600, Michael Siepmann wrote: On 05/18/2016 05:51 PM, Bryan Richter wrote: > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 12:13:34PM -0600, Peter Harpending wrote: >> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Let's take care of the blog

On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Bryan Richter wrote: On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 11:16:09AM -0700, Aaron Wolf wrote: On 05/17/2016 10:21 AM, Bryan Richter wrote: > Website work is blocked on taking care of the blog, so let's do that. > We have to make some decisions,

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] [Snowdrift-team] modifying donations to feed into the mechanism

To me, it seems like arrears is the clear superior option for MVP. Holding funds adds significant legal complexity for what seems like a small benefit -- and it's something that we could transition to later anyway. Imagine we're doing arrears, because that's the easier way. Then, because we

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Next Meeting

Sorry, list; that was intended to be an individual email to mray. On May 13, 2016 8:40:17 PM EDT, Stephen Michel <stephen.mic...@tufts.edu> wrote: >Was yesterday a good Thursday or a bad Thursday? > >Very belated: I do have a pgp key, but I receive very little encrypted >mail,

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] An opt-in we don't prefer could help Snowdrift design , ,

On May 2, 2016 12:11:46 AM EDT, Aaron Wolf wrote: >Incidentally, besides hearing thoughts from others, I'm not clear in >our >new project management where is the best place to write down this idea >so that it gets discussed and can then be something our research and >design

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] PSA: I assume you're also on the snowdrift discuss mailing list

To the discuss list and anyone reading this in the archive: this is cross-posted to the other lists. On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 5:54 PM, Stephen Michel <stephen.mic...@tufts.edu> wrote: On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Peter Harpending <pe...@harpending.org> wrote: On Sat, Mar 26, 2

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] PSA: I assume you're also on the snowdrift discuss mailing list

On Sun, Mar 27, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Peter Harpending <pe...@harpending.org> wrote: On Sat, Mar 26, 2016 at 06:48:58PM -0400, Stephen Michel wrote: Attached is a little diagram of how I think of the mailing list membership. I don't believe there's anything official about how they're

[Snowdrift-discuss] This coming week's meetings

I'm doing a new thing this week! If you don't want to have to worry about messing up time zones, just import the attached ICS files. That doesn't mean skip the rest of this email because there's info about the meetings in here too. 1. Weekly tactical meeting, on Monday. In the meeting, we'll

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] The state of project management. Looking for feedback.

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Aaron Wolf <aa...@snowdrift.coop> wrote: On 03/21/2016 08:45 AM, Stephen Michel wrote: There's still one unanswered question: OpenProject has a nice way to organize meetings and record minutes. What do we replace that with? Here's the criteria I'm w

[Snowdrift-discuss] 2 meetings today (Monday) at 17:00 UTC and 19:00 UTC

There are two meetings planned for tomorrow/today, depending on when you read this: 1. A governance meeting from 17:00-18:45 UTC, to finish ironing out our work structure. http://shovel.snowdrift.coop/meetings/30 2. Our first official tactical meeting, from 19:00-20:00 UTC (the usual time).

[Snowdrift-discuss] Next Meeting

We made a lot of good progress clarifying roles on Monday. We still have a bit more work to do, so I'm going to schedule a meeting. Finding a good time for everyone is hard. It would be easier if we had a listing of everyone's availability so we could just pick a time that works in general

[Snowdrift-discuss] Hanging out in jit.si

Holacracy has Governance meetings and Tactical meetings, but they also assume that all of an organization's partners (employees / volunteers) are physically in the same space, talking to one another as needed to get input. I think we need an equivalent. I'm going to call them "discussions" --

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Governance Mtg March 7 @ 19:00UTC

On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 9:30 PM, Aaron Wolf <aa...@snowdrift.coop> wrote: On 03/06/2016 06:25 PM, Stephen Michel wrote: That's today/tomorrow, depending on when you read this. We will: - Implement the core of Holacracy - Discuss which parts of Holacracy we shouldn't implement a

[Snowdrift-discuss] Governance Mtg March 7 @ 19:00UTC

That's today/tomorrow, depending on when you read this. We will: - Implement the core of Holacracy - Discuss which parts of Holacracy we shouldn't implement and any additional policies we may want. To ensure we have time, there are 3 hours blocked out. Stop by for however long you can afford

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Implementing Holacracy -- TODO's inside

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Charles Wyble wrote: >> Implementing it here at Snowdrift.coop has been on the to-do list for a while, It has? Where is this TODO list that this item is on? AFAIK, the todo list in Aaron's head. On the slim chance my memory from when I

Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] organizing major Snowdrift.coop projects

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 1:14 AM, Charles Wyble wrote: In redmine I'm something of a sub project fiend. They are incredibly useful. Like anything, they can be overused/abused. -Original Message- From: Aaron Wolf [mailto:aa...@snowdrift.coop] Sent: Wednesday, March

Re: [Discuss] on prioritizing next steps for Snowdrift.coop

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 12:18 AM, char...@thefnf.org wrote: Before you dive into process for process sake and die a death of a thousand cuts by the toolchain... I'm seeing lots of massive brain dumps, grandiose plans, long lists. That's a huge amount of information. You'll die from analysis

Re: [Discuss] OpenProject Work Packages Workflow

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:44 PM, Bryan Richter <br...@snowdrift.coop> wrote: On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 04:25:08PM -0500, Stephen Michel wrote: Pre-Alpha (name?): complete site except funding mechanism, where hitting the 'pledge' button signs you up for the 'announce' email list. - P

Re: [Discuss] OpenProject Work Packages Workflow

On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 2:49 PM, Bryan Richter wrote: On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 03:15:38PM -0800, Stephen Yeung wrote: Regarding Milestones they're generally meant for big events (i.e. launches or when you complete a suite of inter-related features) wherein you take

Re: [Discuss] [Funding Mechanism] How to accommodate lower and higher pledge levels

I may agree with you; I haven't quite decided yet. I'm going to continue to argue until I'm convinced one way or the other. On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 6:36 AM, mray <m...@mray.de> wrote: On 20.10.2015 19:09, Stephen Michel wrote: !IMPORTANT! First: I propose we set a Design Freeze De

Re: [Discuss] [Funding Mechanism] How to accommodate lower and higher pledge levels

!IMPORTANT! First: I propose we set a Design Freeze Deadline of next MONDAY, OCT 26 for the mechanism. After that date, the design shall be locked in. --- Second: I'm going to re-pitch my proposal: I hold these to be self-evident. If you agree with me, I don't see what your objection might

[Discuss] [Funding Mechanism] How to accommodate lower and higher pledge levels

In short, I don't believe we actually need any change to the mechanism; we just need to lower the minimum and encourage donation at above-minimum levels. We should do this by keeping in mind that *the average user will tend to stick with the defaults.* Therefore, if we set the recommended

Re: [Discuss] [Funding Mechanism] How to accommodate lower and higher pledge levels

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Aaron Wolf <aa...@snowdrift.coop> wrote: On 10/19/2015 08:20 AM, Stephen Michel wrote: In short, I don't believe we actually need any change to the mechanism; we just need to lower the minimum and encourage donation at above-minimum levels. We

Re: [Discuss] Flagging comments in the forum

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Jonathan Roberts wrote: I don't like the way flagging is currently presented in the forum. To check a box that labels another comment as "defensiveness" or "hate speech" has a lot of potential for escalating conflict...see every

[Discuss] PSA: Don't worry, I will be summarizing all these emails

If the volume of emails today has been overwhelming, don't worry about reading it all. I am going to make a summary of the important points from each thread, some time in the next few days. Cheers, Stephen To avoid further volume, please do not reply to this message.

Re: [Discuss] Fwd: What makes a team member?

While we're going meta... One thing that stands out to me is that this whole discussion is predicated upon the assumption that these 3 classes must exist. I haven't spent enough time reading the bylaws, etc, to determine if this assumption is valid; I just wanted to make it explicit. I will

Re: [Discuss] Flagging comments in the forum

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote: On 10/19/2015 03:47 PM, mray wrote: On 20.10.2015 00:36, Aaron Wolf wrote: On 10/19/2015 03:29 PM, mray wrote: On 19.10.2015 22:47, Bryan Richter wrote: On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 11:40:04AM -0700, Aaron

Re: [Discuss] Agree on a Slogan

I'll also put forward, I ***really*** (3 stars!) like 'help fund' as the first two words of our slogan. I think we're nearing a couple of final options. Perhaps it would be a good idea to conduct some (informal) "market research"? Make a survey that lists a couple of our top choices and ask a