Re: loomio

[Olav Vitters <olav vitters nl>]

On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 05:34:55PM +0100, Marco Scannadinari wrote:
>         On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 10:06:51PM +0100, Marco Scannadinari wrote:
>         > If someone posts a proposal on gnome-devel, for example, it would not be
>         > efficient or easy for each user to give their approval: "Yeah I love
>         
>         Here you clearly assume that it will be used for software development.
>
> I did say "for example" - this service can be used globally accross the
> GNOME Foundation and its groups.
>
>         If you want to test something, a usability study should be done. Not
>         random people who show up for some decision. That's going to be just as
>         biased as having the decision taken by the current people.
>
> I'm not saying that we should invite everyone to the discussion, but
> even so, having random people would be completely un-biased, as they
> would probably have no affiliation with the project (for usability
> studies anyway).

A usability study is totally different than voting! Furthermore, if you
invite random people to join, things *will* be biased. Only people who
care enough will show up.

The objective should be to have usable software. For that, there should
be usability studies. IMO there are not enough usability studies done at
the moment.

But if we lack usability studies, I don't see voting as a solution. IMO
it'll just make things worse.

> We could probably have a discussion locked to members of the
> design-team, devel-team(?), translation-team, etc, and have invites sent
> if someone is not part of the team and would be appreciated in the
> discussion. Even if this feature does not exist, the source is free and
> can be modified on GNOME's own loomio instance if the devs are not
> willing to implement the potential commit(s).

Release team just votes in an IRC channel and we make minutes and write
those on a wiki. Sometimes we're meeting in person and we vote by asking
'who agrees'. I'm not saying a web tool might not help with such cases,
but you're arguing two different things at the same time. Partly about
voting within existing teams, partly that other people should join with
IMO the assumption that would improve usability (I disagree, others
already gave enough explanation why).

-- 
Regards,
Olav