I would like to suggest that the Charter Rules for this group
be added to the beta.groups.io Wiki.

It would help educate newcomers to the group, and remind
veterans of the group, about the rules of engagement.

To assist with this suggestion, I have extracted elements
from the various emails on this topic and added them below.
This is a rough draft.

Stan/jp

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Objective
---------
To capture new features, updates to existing features, and bugs.


Alternate Help : HOW TO
-----------------------
Groups IO Help
https://groups.io/static/help

Group Managers Forum : Messages
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/topics

Group Managers Forum : Wiki Knowledge Base
https://groups.io/g/GroupManagersForum/wiki/home


The Charter
-----------
This is the new charter for the main beta group. This message
outlines how I've changed the set up and would like to run the
group going forward.

This group is now set so that all NEW topics are moderated.
Therefore, expect a delay before your post shows up if it
creates a new topic.

This group now requires topics to be tagged with a hashtag.
These are the currently available category hashtags for users :

#bug
#fixed

#suggestion
#done

#meta

#misc


#bug hashtag is for submitting bug reports to main@beta.groups.io
instead of support@groups.io

#fixed hashtag is for bugs that have been fixed.

#suggestion hashtag is for new features, and for changes to
existing features

#done hashtag is for suggestions that have been implemented

#meta is the tag to use when making suggestions about this group.

If you want to post something and are not sure which hashtag to use
or there isn't an appropriate hashtag, use #misc, and I will fix it.


Posting Etiquette
-----------------
Avoid using "I agree", "me too", "No one will use that", "That would
cause a mess", and so on

Discussions/additions/clarifications should be fact-based and add to
understanding or clarification (or forbid improvement) of someone
else's suggestion, not leading to defending one's opinions (rather
than presenting or clarifying facts,) which adds tons of chaff.


Proposal for Proposing Proposals
--------------------------------
It seems it would be good for there to be a way to 'discuss' an
idea (the "proposal") before it actually becomes a suggestion.

Which means that the suggestion process involves two steps, the
#proposal and the #suggestion.

Once a consensus is reached (and only then), submit a #suggestion,
referencing the proposal topic. If there's no interest in the
#proposal, it does not become a #suggestion.

Ideally, I would not have to moderate (or spend much time involved
with) the #proposal process. I think we all want me focused on
actually getting stuff implemented. :-)

Some proposals are discussed in the GroupManagersForum that eventually
find their way into beta.groups.io as a suggestion.

Stan,

With all due respect, simple posts stating “I agree” (with sufficient quotation
to identify WHAT is being agreed with or to) and “I disagree because…” are
vital and appropriate steps toward consensus by any reasonable definition.

Little discussion on a given subject may indicate there is little opposition to
what is posted, or it may indicate few or no one else cares about the subject.
Big difference in deciding how or whether to proceed further.

Respectfully,

WRB

—

On Feb 13, 2020, at 9:11 PM, JediPirx <stan@...> wrote:

I would like to suggest that the Charter Rules for this group
be added to the beta.groups.io Wiki.

It would help educate newcomers to the group, and remind
veterans of the group, about the rules of engagement.

To assist with this suggestion, I have extracted elements
from the various emails on this topic and added them below.
This is a rough draft.

Stan/jp

----------------------------------------------------------------------

<snip>

Posting Etiquette
-----------------
Avoid using "I agree", "me too", "No one will use that", "That would
cause a mess", and so on

Discussions/additions/clarifications should be fact-based and add to
understanding or clarification (or forbid improvement) of someone
else's suggestion, not leading to defending one's opinions (rather
than presenting or clarifying facts,) which adds tons of chaff.

If a point of discussion is incompletely presented, i.e. advantages but
not disadvantages, it is appropriate that anyone aware of this clarify
that part of the discussion with factual information of equally valid
considerations. A “culture” of dogmatism is a culture hostile to original
thinking.

Proposal for Proposing Proposals

I would instead say “How to prepare and present a #suggestion"

--------------------------------
It seems it would be good for there to be a way to 'discuss' an
idea (the "proposal") before it actually becomes a suggestion.

As I understand it, the GroupManagersForum (GMF) is comprised
of founders/owners/administrators; i.e. Groups.io CUSTOMERS.
[beta] is Groups.io Administration.

As is stated at the end here, it would seem reasonable and appropriate
that ALL ideas be discussed in detail in GMF before a suggestion# is
submitted on [beta].

Which means that the suggestion process involves two steps, the
#proposal and the #suggestion.

Actually, this might be more clear if it were #topic/discussion and the #suggestion.?

Once a consensus is reached (and only then), submit a #suggestion,
referencing the proposal topic. If there's no interest in the
#proposal, it does not become a #suggestion.

I find the first sentence intellectually intimidating. What is specifically meant by
"Once a consensus is reached (and only then)? Those who might consider making
a suggestion should not be discouraged by an inappropriately complex or unclear
process.

True “consensus” is a level of agreement following evaluation seldom achieved.
It may also be utterly unrelated to the ease or difficulty of implementation. Some
decisions appropriate to circumstances may be appropriate but unpopular.

Ideally, I would not have to moderate (or spend much time involved
with) the #proposal process. I think we all want me focused on
actually getting stuff implemented. :-)

WHO is speaking here (above)? We know ALL posts to [beta] are moderated. We
DON’T know by whom. Presumably this is delegated. Mark’s personal attention is
much better invested elsewhere.

Conversely, however, it is an inseparable and essential “part of the process” that
Mark invest whatever time necessary to understand the history and group support
“pushing” a suggestion# before deciding to toss it, implement it, or study it further.

We are notified weekly what has been changed or implemented. We aren’t told
which suggestions have been considered and rejected and/or which remain under
consideration in some form.

Some proposals are discussed in the GroupManagersForum that eventually
find their way into beta.groups.io as a suggestion.

Unfortunately I have to say "I disagree" with the vast majority (or at least a whole lot) of this. I don't know where it's coming from. It does not seem to be coming from the original "charter" that Mark posted, but seems to stem from a subsequent suggestion by someone else. Just for example, this

Avoid using "I agree", "me too", "No one will use that", "That would
cause a mess", and so on

strikes me as much too broad and restrictive. It lumps in unhelpful comments like "no one would use that" with possibly helpful, constructive ones. There is such a thing as legitimate agreement or disagreement based on facts.

I also disagree with the section about "proposals" becoming "suggestions." I would not participate here if every suggestion I think of making has to go through a "proposal" process to be vetted by other group members. I realize that's the way things are done in GMF and that's fine (I don't belong to that group anyway). 

We don't "all have to focus on getting stuff implemented." We are not the company. We're just a bunch of users, all of whom have our own opinions on things.
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

Hear, Hear.

On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 02:39 PM, txercoupemuseum.org wrote:

I don’t agree with everything J says

What???  You don't? Tsk, tsk! :-)
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 10:52 PM, JediPirx wrote:

These are the currently available category hashtags for users :

#bug
#fixed

#suggestion
#done

#meta

#misc

#fixed and #done are moderator hashtags, not for users.  They would be added if/when that state is reached.  I do agree that there should be an easy place for others, especially newcomers, to find the mandate(s) for the group.  A sticky, either post or wiki page, would seem to be the most noticeable.

Duane

On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 03:39 PM, Duane wrote:

#fixed and #done are moderator hashtags, not for users.  They would be added if/when that state is reached.

That brings up the issue, which occurred to me last night, of what happens when a bug is tagged #fixed by Mark and it turns out not to really be fixed. Does Mark remove the tag? In the cases I've noticed so far, they've retained the tag. But that's probably an issue for another thread.

I do agree that there should be an easy place for others, especially newcomers, to find the mandate(s) for the group.  A sticky, either post or wiki page, would seem to be the most noticeable.

I agree also. But it's already in the Guidelines page.
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu

On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 05:43 PM, J_Catlady wrote:

I agree also. But it's already in the Guidelines page.

Oops, I hadn't seen it there.  Maybe have the Guidelines sent on join (and every month?), with a "lock immediately" hashtag.  Or make a locked post with only the charter and sticky it since the 'help' info is a sticky wiki.  Really anything that is more obvious.  (Time for a RED subject line? ;>)

Duane

On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 05:43 PM, J_Catlady wrote :

I agree also. But it's already in the Guidelines page.

Oops for me too. I did not see the Guidelines entry in the
left-hand side menu.

My reason for starting the topic was that I had some confusion
(senior moment ?) about the Charter and I was looking for the
summary in the Wiki which I could not find because it was not
there.

Fri, 14 Feb 2020 13:47:36, J_Catlady wrote :

Unfortunately I have to say "I disagree" with the vast majority
(or at least a whole lot) of this. I don't know where it's coming
from.

In reviewing the postings on the Charter, I compiled ad verbatim,
what I felt were key points from the various emails to assist in
documenting the Charter. It was a rough draft.

In the postings, there were comments on etiquette and "proposal vs
suggestion" which did not seem to have a conclusion.

Based on the responses, etiquette is policed as required, and
proposals/ideas/topic could/should be discussed in GMF before
a suggestion is submitted on [beta].

Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 03:39 PM, Duane wrote:

I do agree that there should be an easy place for others,
especially newcomers, to find the mandate(s) for the group.
A sticky, either post or wiki page, would seem to be the most
noticeable.

I agree :-)


I appreciate everyone's response. I am amenable to closing this
topic.

Stan/jp