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

2016-12-22 Thread Jason Harrer
Not sure where my comments would fit into the conversation, so please forgive me in advance for responding on top instead of within the thread. I think the topic of next steps is a great idea. I think the topic of modifying the current logic is rather premature. We don't have enough data to

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

2016-12-22 Thread Aaron Wolf
On 12/22/2016 06:50 PM, Jason Harrer wrote: > Not sure where my comments would fit into the conversation, so please > forgive me in advance for responding on top instead of within the thread. > > I think the topic of next steps is a great idea. I think the topic of > modifying the current logic

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

2016-12-22 Thread Stephen Michel
On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Stephen Michel wrote: On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 1:41 PM, Bryan Richter 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 immediate goals.

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

2016-12-22 Thread Aaron Wolf
On 12/22/2016 02:14 PM, Stephen Michel wrote: > Although we need to think beyond MVP, we still need to limit our scope. > I am including the following because it strengthens the argument for > this system. > > Please ONLY discuss it insofar as it relates to "should we adopt the > system?". Do

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

2016-12-22 Thread Aaron Wolf
To summarize some IRC thoughts I wrote: I think the appeal of set goals for money and patrons is understandable but problematic. Projects and patrons are *shitty* at determining these things. The majority of patrons will be *wrong* about their predictions about how they'll feel about their budget