Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2020 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Re: [board-discuss] Initiative to improve communication channels

Op 18-7-2020 om 22:58 schreef Daniel Armando Rodriguez:
El 2020-07-18 12:01, Telesto escribió:
Decidim allows to enrich spaces for participation through multiple
available components (surveys, proposals, follow-up of results,
comments and several more).

-> True; as - I think I said - no experience with all participation
tools.. Did try decidim quickly today.  I personally find not utmost attractive visually (not judging
the functionality, capability's or scale ability). Another part is a
full fetched participation environment really needed. Or is it rather
overblown functionality nobody actually gonna use. The number of
active commenting users isn't extremely large; and the number
responding here even lower.  Even polls at attract representative amount
of users. I happy already with kind of comment board showing depth (so
responds too) and a moderation score (the moderation can be done by
anyone logged in at the site). Gray means Off-topic / irrelevant; +3
Spotlight. In addition can a vote be added; to support/unsupported.
And maybe a poll functionality Are more options actually needed? I'm
would be quite happy with forum/ bulletin board with decent comment
functionality and possibly to support a comment and/or prioritizing

This e-mail message board is not my type of thing. Unstructured, hard
to go through. Bug tracker message system is already a lot better. And
a message board with comments (which easily show who is responding to
what and being able to filter based on votes and or moderation score)
is perfect already. The 'voting'/ supporting should be enough for non
fluent people, I think. And message board maybe even be translated too
by some automatic translation site. Quality is often quite acceptable.
Visa versa people could use a translation side to write their opinion
in native language, while being automatically translated to English
with some  'heading: automatic translation" and the source text below.
That's what I do if there is a posting of a bug in

And it could environment could be used also on As I'm talking about message board with
same functionality (except slightly improved comment system). So to
backend or the whole site could shared. Without bloating everything
with again a new environment for participation. Including maintaining
(security updates/ configuration)/ moderating etc. And all the
comments can also send as e-mail message to the e-mail archive if
people like nabble/mailings.

Fair enough,

In my opinion, one cannot always depend on translation tools to say something. I usually use them, but many times it is necessary to make adjustments to bring the translated text closer to what you really want to say.

The case of translating text is different, since even if it is not the best result, the idea can be understood.
But that's just my opinion.

In addition, I believe that a full participatory environment is necessary. In principle, because it concentrates different tools on a single platform.

Regarding the mentions about updates and maintenance, I have already expressed my willingness to add my collaboration if necessary.

I also believe that when everyone can feel the benefits of such a platform many people will welcome it.

-> Also a truth in that.. I'm also not intending to shoot the idea down. Only giving a different vision. It's not black/white. I appriciate the initiatif.  I know that translation tools aren't perfect, but that issue won't be solved with any community tool (but that's pure assumption; without knowing the facts).

-> In addition, I believe that a full participatory environment is necessary. In principle, because it concentrates different tools on a single platform. I'm not totally following the argument here. It's start with inventaring the use cases (how is it deployed) and the tooling needed for those cases. Not seen many cases where participation was useful. Mostly everthing flows/ functions without lots of disturbances. However, I'm only seeing a side of the departements around (QA/UX/Dev). Yes there are some UX arguments which ideally would be discussed at participation level  to get more feedback (Autocorrect markdown enabled be default). The meeting is always time based with not to many attendees and not many people are following the bug feed. However not sure if those few cases make a full participatory environment needed. If the participatory environment isn't used activily or if there is not much to be discussed. Every departement does it's job normally. So the instances of interacting rather scarce, IMHO. The Marketing Communication Plan is an example where you want to give feedback (or I would still be neglected), until it landed in Master/RC. I did get a memo I think, but didn't get my attention.

So yes, ideally  a full participatory environment within fit/belong in a meriocratic community. Except reality - in the current context - most ist done by the full-timers. And as long as there are no major items to discusse. Everthing goes on well.

-> Regarding the mentions about updates and maintenance, I have already expressed my willingness to add my collaboration if necessary. Missed that :-). For the record, I'm only the QA guy who landed in the mailing list here :-). I'm surely not having any sway in the topic. No worries. Only expressing my thought/impression. I'm bit skeptic if it would get enough traction where a full fledged participatory environment is effective/functional. I always assume that most of the users don't care about the organization or how the product is produced. They are only interest in the end product (a gratis Office Suite). It's bit like politics. Mostly not to interesting. Goes on in the background.. Until it hurts a group and 'the people' start to make their voice heard. There are currently policy implemented in the Netherlands which are in the making for maybe 10 years (probably even longer); only some complains in margins. Live goes on, until the start rolling out  the policy (or attempt to do so).  Hell breaks loose; how could they... all sorts of discontent.. they could have known.. they could have complained earlier on. But all kinds of excuses/ thoughts. Not interesting,; others will manage it; it are only plans, they will be never executed. It did take 10 years, so will take again 10 years, nothing to worry about.. And there is still strong 'argument' that plebiscite shouldn't have a say. Which pointed out here also. It's used for feedback; not for the decision making itself. Still belong to the board, because they know the best/ have 'inside information' (with a positive connotation). The public might want proper roads without paying taxes. However not something any politician realize (Yes, there are way's  semantically? Don't call it taxes but contributions. Or create a communistic system with only a collective. Without private property taxes maybe not needed. However in essence still a burden for the public as they still pay the price.

There number of bug reporters aren't to high and there are only few regulars at QA/UX. Or the bug tracker is to hard to use (read some complains here and there). And it's English only which might be entry barrier.

-> I also believe that when everyone can feel the benefits of such a platform many people will welcome it.

It might attract more people; really don't know. I'm no expert on the LibreOffice community or language sub community's. However I have never seen many. I'm seeing only a small group of (very) active people; some passing by once in a while and those who do a single bug report of write a single comment.

I let it up to others to evaluate & decide

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
Privacy Policy:


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.