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 working off of:- Tactical meetings have two outputs. Holacracy calls them "Projects andNext-actions"; we'll call them "User Stories and Tasks." - User stories and tasks will be publicly recorded in Taiga. - Governance meetings produce changes to Roles and Policies.- These are recorded in our governance docs, which are in a git repo[1]. We can make one commit per meeting, so we'll know which meeting produced what outputs. - Informal Meetings are really just another name for people getting together to chat.- Remember, in Holacracy, decisions are made by one role -- whichever has the accountability for doing the thing that the decision is about. - Discusion in an informal meeting *might* give someone the info theyneed to make a decision. IRC or email might do the exact same thing. - The only reason I'm calling these meetings at all is that it's common for roles to make decisions in informal meetings. - Meetings are open to the public. Here are my opinions based on the above:- It's not important to keep minutes of Tactical or Governance meetings. - In the spirit of open development, it *IS* important to have a placewhere the the snowdrift community (that's you) has a chance to give their thoughts on decisions and understand why those decisions weremade. That means some public place where we post what was talked aboutin Informal Meetings.- It's probably not important to keep **minutes** of informal meetings-- it's probably enough just to post "These are the things we talked about and these are our conclusions" somewhere. - It's important to publicize meeting times. Two open questions:1) Where should we post a record of what was discussed in informal meetings?2) Where should we post times for upcoming meetings? More opinions/answers:- I'd like to avoid forcing people to make an account with a new serviceif I can help it.- Short-term thought is that we can probably keep both of these in themailing list.- Longer-term thought is that upgrading to mailman3 or Discourse insteadof the current mailing lists (mailman2). Both mailman3 and Discourseprovide both full email list functionality and web interfaces (forums)to reply to discussion threads. Discourse provides the additionalbenefit of using tags instead of lists, which means you can tag a postwith two different tags, and send it to two different lists, without sending it double to anyone subscribed to both lists. - Discourse is, IMO, the better long-term solution but might be more disruptive to implement short-term.Since Gitit supports being hierarchical, it's no longer absurd to trackmeetings in the wiki, the same as we had done before but now stored in their own directory. It's clunky, but I think it makes sense.
I think gitit/repo would make sense if it were important to keep a record of WHEN and WHERE decisions were made and WHO said WHAT. I don't think that is important.
I think WHY decisions are made is important, and I think getting feedback on that WHY is important. So I think the ML is a better place for that than gitit because gitit does not have a good discussion section. Imagine if we put minutes into gitit. How would someone in the community comment on them? They'd start an email thread that references the gitit page. That's not great for now, since it means another click, but it's even worse for archiving, because discussion is not sufficiently connected to the content. Minutes keep track of who said what. I don't think that's super relevant to people, and it adds more work for anyone who wants to know what we talked about and offer feedback. If there's a simple summary of content and rationale, I think that's WAY easier to read and people are way more likely to engage with it.
Further: Imagine we have an informal meeting where we talk about legal, design, and development issues. I'd rather send 3 emails -- to the dev, design, and legal mailing lists -- each about one topic, than send an identical email to each list saying "look at this page with a bunch of irrelevant information and discuss."
When the Board is set up, I DO think we should keep minutes of *their* meetings, because WHO, WHERE, and WHEN are all much more important. I think gitit would be a great place for these.
Agree/disagree?
The mainconcern about Gitit is to make sure to set it up to block spam. Ideally,we could figure out how to share auth with the snowdrift site eventually, but that probably won't happen right away.
Agreed. It is definitely possible. fr33domlover and chreekat can give the best opinion on how much work it'll be.
FWIW, Discourse can do Single Sign On (SSO) (aka share auth) with the main site, too. It would take way too much work to be worth doing for Alpha (MVP), but is probably worth doing for Beta. That would mean anybody on Discourse would agree to the honor code first, which is another big benefit.
So I'll wrap up this monster email by proposing the following: - For now, we send out meeting announcements to the mailing list. - For now, we send out a record of what was discussed in Informal Meetings to the relevant mailing list. - Long-term, we upgrade our mailing lists to Discord.I'm sure you meant Discourse not Discord. Discord is some meeting/chat thing that seems proprietary from what I can tell.
Correct. Discord was a typo -- it's both proprietary and not useful for tracking minutes -- I meant Discourse.
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
