Dear friends, it has been proposed that we try to form working groups of 2-4 people to focus on doing concrete tasks to strengthen and promote the network. There is a lot of good work to do.
I would like to propose the forming of a single working group because 1) it’ll be lucky if we enough people for this with spare time and energy right now 2) we can start off slow because we never did this kind of thing in this network before.
I intend to try and form a regular schedule in which we meet online and work together. If you would like to join you probably need some free time and some sort of similary time zone (we figure it out). No prior experience with the network is necessary. You should probably be a member or plan to become one.
Some examples where it could work to mandate small groups to get things going:
define a decision making process
finishing the code of conduct
coordinating monthly meetings (a duo or group on that task is better than leaving it on one person’s shoulders, even if that one person is doing a great job right now )
I think maintenance tasks formed already a team.
When basics are settled there can be small teams other tasks, like
general coordination
integration of new members
communication and visibility for general public in search for a LH
awareness raising and technical emancipation tools
… (just imagining, could go anywhere)
@decentral1se I don’t think it should be all loaded to one group. It’s actually what we have now.
Why only one group? Because 1) we don’t have enough active people to form 5+ groups 2) if we do that, who is managing all those groups so that they don’t fall apart? I’ve seen this done so many times, everybody gets really enthusiastic and splits into many groups and then it all falls down. What I’m trying to propose here is a “core working group”, so to speak, people who care enough to get their hands dirty in whatever aspect of organising this network (as their capacity allows) until there is a clear path and more hands for working group 2. Think about it, if we had only 2-4 people meeting twice monthly for an hour at a time to work together, we’d make progress! I want to start small.
@decentral1se I don’t think it should be all loaded to one group
I agree, but as I said before, we don’t have capacity for more right now. Who is going to be in all these working groups? We are growing in membership and people are applying more and more to be in the network but we are seeing less and less participation. I’m not saying I have a good plan but I am saying my plan is adapted to deal with the reality of nearly zero collective network participation in the right now.
I think having one core working group for now would be ideal until things start to pick up. Get some people together that are passionate about the network and have some free time to make decisions, come up with solutions, etc. Once things start to pick up a bit more, we can create additional groups and start to delegate tasks.
I would love to be part of it but my timezone might be a problem; I’m in EST.
yes I think it’s not providing technical services that we need from a network (yes of course there are some tools we need to maintain…), the members take care of that part within their structures. The task I propose are more matching with what Framasoft does within the CHATONS and what they will have to take care of themselves when deframasoftation comes… and LH will have to get going in order to be ready to rock and roll one day.
what capacities do we have ? Maybe we could start being this core group as you propose, to see who is there.
But I like to be clear about my energies : I’m willing to pledge for a specific task or two or some (under the condition of not being alone on a task). I will not promise to be part of a group that is expected to take care of everything.
I wonder if @gust would be available to work on finishing the decision making process. It’s a basis we need, and he has some valuable experience and interest in that topic.
I do not understand why everything so far has been done in the open, and now a number of self-appointed “group” wants to do things differently. Why should I send you a message instead of keeping discussing things here?
This group should appear in the groups list
It should use public topics, not private messages
More importantly, this group should be chartered to decide in advance what has to be done. IMO, this process has been happening and we have a #todo list that has been extending for at least 6 months. I do not see why a random, unchartered group might be let working in private.
Why are you using such language? “random”, “unchartered group”, “totally opposed”. Is this idea of people trying to volunteer their free time to contribute to the network so revolting to you? Are we suddenly a group of unelected bureaucrats running a cabal who wish to subvert the established processes?
You already demolished my mental energies for contributing to this unchartered group working in private.
Please stop accusing me because I’m stating an opinion about a collective process, while you seem to be ignoring what has been done so far – including me and others waiting for months that people do volunteer their free time according to collectively decided values, such as transparency. This is unacceptable.
If some people want to prepare a task together before they present it to the network for decisions or further work, they can do it in the way they prefer. keeping everything in the open might not be the way everyone wants or can work.
No one said a work group should make decisions.
The network seems stuck at the moment, why not trying if people taking up tasks in smaller groups could move things forward ?
This work group should (of course) not decide how decisions should be made within the network. But prepare a proposal that can then be accepted or get feedback for improvement.
What do you propose to achieve our decision making procedure?
)
