Difference between revisions of "Talk:Pending Proposals"

From Hive76 Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
 
= Adam's Points =  
 
= Adam's Points =  
'''
+
'''I don't think we should have to wait for weds to vote on everything. Is there a good reason we can't use online polls and just have a set  time votes are accepted based on impact/urgency?'''
I don't think we should have to wait for weds to vote on everything. Is there a good reason we can't use online polls and just have a set  time votes are accepted based on impact/urgency?'''
 
 
IMHO talking in person is often the fastet way to agree or discuss something. We could just make a poll, but I think we'd make better smarter faster stronger decisions when we have some in person discussion.  It also is a good marker/end-of-timeline for voting on something if we do have an 'open poll' vote.
 
IMHO talking in person is often the fastet way to agree or discuss something. We could just make a poll, but I think we'd make better smarter faster stronger decisions when we have some in person discussion.  It also is a good marker/end-of-timeline for voting on something if we do have an 'open poll' vote.
 
Also, often proposals get tweaked/updated during a dicussion. Long open polls (3+days)and I worry people will vote on an alpha version, but disagree with beta version, so we have to do vote-retraction or something.
 
Also, often proposals get tweaked/updated during a dicussion. Long open polls (3+days)and I worry people will vote on an alpha version, but disagree with beta version, so we have to do vote-retraction or something.

Revision as of 17:00, 15 December 2009

Adam's Points

I don't think we should have to wait for weds to vote on everything. Is there a good reason we can't use online polls and just have a set time votes are accepted based on impact/urgency? IMHO talking in person is often the fastet way to agree or discuss something. We could just make a poll, but I think we'd make better smarter faster stronger decisions when we have some in person discussion. It also is a good marker/end-of-timeline for voting on something if we do have an 'open poll' vote. Also, often proposals get tweaked/updated during a dicussion. Long open polls (3+days)and I worry people will vote on an alpha version, but disagree with beta version, so we have to do vote-retraction or something. Maybe the best thing would be to have an open poll, and just end it Wednesday at midnight. Part of the weekly standup could be talking over anything that is in the queue. For time-sensitive issues, I think an online poll is awesome. As for the proposal process, is the original author responsible for making modifications on the wiki based on changes from discussion? We should probably also provide a link from the wiki page back to the original discussion list post. I like both of those ideas.

From Jack

Can we password protect a wiki? Certain details like phone numbers and budget stuff can't go on a wiki. Jack has a good point on that. I'd say for stuff that is private, we can put it on google docs as 'members only' and in the wiki post a title and a link to the protected vote/stuff.

IMHO (I'm curious about others) very little/few things would need that protection, negotiation, big purchases, final budget stuff probably. But I don't think general reimbursement would have to be private.  Thoughts?

(related) Docs vs Wiki:

Personally, I fully intend to continue using google docs for sharing/collecting data. We get way too much for free (access control, auto-gen forms) that wouldn't easily be replaced by a single application. I think it's completely reasonable to use google docs if there's a project you would rather keep under wraps for a while. Hell yeah, well said.