Topics

moderated Process to propose new features #meta


 

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 07:51 AM, Marv Waschke wrote:
I would strictly limit the suggestion analysis board to vetting suggestions from the beta group and prohibit the board from making suggestions themselves
The problem is that in order not to be a deal-breaker (for me at least), the board would have to be carefully chosen by Mark to consist of people highly familiar with the product with at least some (preferably professional) technical experience. And forbidding such people from making suggestions would not make much sense.

IMO if would be better for an actual company employee, or employees, to be put in charge of vetting suggestions. But I don't know if any exist yet.
 
--
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


Bob Bellizzi
 

First, I want to apologize for my inappropriate last message which I've deleted.

I want to climb on Catlady's bandwagon a bit further.
Tracking items in Beta, once we have a system to work with, is not a technical job.
A clerical person with a bit of training and minimum of process notes/diagrams
could easily  handle that part of the job.
The job could be a part time consultant and Mark need only spend a couple of hours training them to do it.,
In fact, a nontechnical person would be ideal; we wouldn't be able to browbeat them; they're just doing their job.
I've found it pretty easy to train 16 year olds to use a database.  My current problem is a paucity of them in my neighborhood.
All that's needed is a simple but expandable system where the results are available to the carnivores of Beta to see.

--

Bob Bellizzi


 

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 01:55 PM, Bob Bellizzi wrote:
I want to climb on Catlady's bandwagon a bit further.
I don't know what you're talking about lol. I don't see anything in your message that agrees with what I've said previously. What I've said is that I am very leery of (and would personally avoid, if it happens) having all the suggestions I make go through a group of amateur volunteers for "vetting," as was suggested by soeone. But I have nothing against someone - volunteer or otherwise - maintaining a simple tracking system. 

As for apologies, I also apologize for saying that I don't want to pay to whitewash Mark's fence. That was inappropriate and I've already told him so in an offlist message. I just don't know what we're talking about here any more.
 
--
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


Christos G. Psarras
 

Mark et al,

Sorry, late to the huddle here, but I wanted to hopefully contribute something as well, as I really like this live experiment we are participating in.

Regarding unnecessary time spent on beta, I agree with others who suggested delegation; delegate the really unnecessary (for you) stuff to one or two folks, like the moderating pending suggestions part, so you can concentrate on the approving pending suggestions part.  Someone to do level-1 stuff, either 1-2 trustworthy volunteers if you found them, or paid, depending on how involved the assistance duties will be.  I don't know how much time you spend moderating & approving topics on beta, but if quite some, maybe at the minimum, delegate the weeding out/editing/merging/searching/etc stuff, leaving you a more or less clean pending queue for you to go through and approve stuff.  MF was a good step towards the setup but it still requires human QA-like intervention.  Maybe get the helpers to also tidy-up and moderate the group as well, whatever it may be that will free up your time from stuff that someone else can do.

I like the concept behind your idea of the two hashtag-step process, but maybe go at it a bit differently, using already mentioned ideas as inspiration; leave #suggestion as it is now as the first step hashtag, it's easily recognizable, well-known, and already has baggage, so just let it be what it is.  Then create additional official "bucket" (stage) mod hashtags, one of them to serve as the second hashtag in your idea, maybe #acknowledged, #received, or whatever; you already have two of those bucket hashtags already, #fixed and #done, and are using them as a notification/tracking tool already, so take that a little further, add strategically-named #bucket/stage hashtags and append-use them on the #suggestion thread.  This should greatly extend beta's notification/tracking capabilities.

Anyway, continuing, when some suggestion merits going to your second hashtag step, which I presume means no more talk-talk as it's now in my court, lock the thread and add the bucket hashtag for it; it's still a #suggestion, but now it's officially #acknowledged and awaiting its fate.  And if you were to add a few strategic #process hashtags, depending on how much info you want to provide, you can create quite good tracking capability and let users know of the status of a suggestion during its entire lifetime:  it goes from #suggestion #<1ststage> to #suggestion #<next_stage> (and/or) #<whatever-process>, ..., all the way to #suggestion #done.

Finally, regarding subgroups, in this case they may be better for using them as announcement lists, but also in the occasion if it is something beta-related but you'd like to group-discuss somewhere else besides beta.  I also agree that normal suggestion discussion stay on beta.

Cheers,
Christos