Difference between revisions of "Talk:Geohashing General Meetings"

Revision as of 17:26, 27 May 2009

I don't see the advantage of a general meeting honestly. That's a tool used in communities before the web existed, meant to get together a plenary capable of taking decisions. I would oppose however, to give decision rights to a general meeting when 1) that implies that people are left out (because of time zone and attendance problems), and 2) better means exists to involve everyone in a discussion. If we needed to take decisions more quickly, we could set deadlines on any discussion in the wiki.
If it's meant to be a nice get-together in the channel to further discussion, that's fine by me. That's what we are doing all the time. :D -- relet 17:20, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Just to address the points one by one:

1. We can iron out all the little kinks etc before making a decision,

That's what talk pages are for.

2. It's a hell of a lot faster

I suggest voting deadlines, if you want to act quickly, and not exclude anyone in a decision. But generally, a decision is ready when it has been around for a while, and there is no opposition.

3. It allows for full communication of ideas more effectively,

In a chatroom? A detailed write-up of your ideas should get the message across much more easily. And it's permanent. Chatrooms are noisy and lossy.

4. Under discussion topics move so fast and I for one always forget to re-check them.

Didn't you just say that discussions in the wiki were too slow-paced?

-- relet 17:26, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 I don't see the advantage of a general meeting honestly. That's a tool used in communities before the web existed, meant to get together a plenary capable of taking decisions. I would '''oppose''' however, to give decision rights to a general meeting when 1) that implies that people are left out (because of time zone and attendance problems), and 2) better means exists to involve everyone in a discussion. If we needed to take decisions more quickly, we could set deadlines on any discussion in the wiki.<br/>
 If it's meant to be a nice get-together in the channel to further discussion, that's fine by me. That's what we are doing all the time. :D -- [[User:relet|relet]] 17:20, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
+:Just to address the points one by one:
+:''1. We can iron out all the little kinks etc before making a decision,''
+::That's what talk pages are for.
+:''2. It's a hell of a lot faster''
+:: I suggest voting deadlines, if you want to act quickly, and not exclude anyone in a decision. But generally, a decision is ready when it has been around for a while, and there is no opposition.
+:''3. It allows for full communication of ideas more effectively,''
+::In a chatroom? A detailed write-up of your ideas should get the message across much more easily. And it's permanent. Chatrooms are noisy and lossy.
+:''4. Under discussion topics move so fast and I for one always forget to re-check them.''
+::Didn't you just say that discussions in the wiki were too slow-paced?
+:-- [[User:relet|relet]] 17:26, 27 May 2009 (UTC)