@stevecoffman Right now the privacy stuff is 95% done and we're working on minor language tweeks. Subgroup of voters is another iteration.

@jonlemmon @robertguthrie I wonder whether the public discussion option needs to be split into public discussions which are searchable in search engines and those which can be seen by members who log into the loomio installation.

@neilmorris - that sounds like a private discussion to me. You can have groups with public and private discussions. Or you can make a subgroup with private only discussions.

Are there any differences between what you're describing and a private discussion?

@robertguthrie - there is a slight difference. One is public, as in searchable on the WWW, the other would be searchable to people who log in to the Loomio website i.e semi-public but because you have to log in to the site not searchable through public search engines. This option to me is quite different from having a private discussion.

To me it's actually the same as a private discussion. I can't technically see the difference.

Hrrmm.. Sorry that seems a bit blunt. At this stage I see there is a slight difference but I think I'll run with how we have it because it's so far along and the difference is so slight, and potentially confusing or difficult to communicate to the user.

Happy to review later @ne

Hey folks what do you think of the language in this version? Is it clear? Could it be clearer?

@seantilleycommunit @joshuavial @alanna @jessedoud

Only comment would be under "How do People Join". I'd go with something like....

• Open Group - anyone can join, no approval required
• By Request - new members need to be approved
• Invitation Only - new members must be invited to join

@richarddbartlett not sure how much feedback you're looking for, but if you want more I'd suggest raising a proposal like "the new groups settings language makes sense to me" - if you do that, update the context panel first.

Wow, looking great!
Thinking it would be nice to add some reassurance so users know that these options can be changed in the future. And labels and placeholders on the textareas could use a polish.
As is, to me this looks like a clear improvement.

small comment really but I just read this about where best to put placeholder text/ tips, i.e. outside of the form field:
http://goo.gl/QKt7xq

er, more cool stuff on placeholders here
http://blog.circleci.com/adaptive-placeholders/

(the guys at http://www.camplight.net/ must be into this stuff at the mo because both links are from their facebook page https://www.facebook.com/camplight )

I really like @alanna's suggestion about Open group, By request, and Invitation only - feels like a really clear articulation of the 3 options (and gives each a label to make it instantly understandable).

Also love @jessedoud 's suggestion about making it clear to people that these settings can be changed.

This is awesome work @robertguthrie , massive improvement!!

Plus I love hacking the proposal to engage us all in the process :)

It's a little bit difficult for me to answer because my english is not very good.
It'll be usefull and maybe interesting to make traductions, and to verify them if people are able and have time to do it.

Thanks for Loomio it's realy a good way for me to take decision after proposition.

See vote statement. Looks really good though. :)

here's my go :

Thanks a lot for this button Traduction
So quickly... it's help me already even if the traduction is not so good, specialy when we work on detaiIs.
Yo ;.)

Hey folks we deployed these changes last night - have a play and let us know if you have any feedback :)

I think it'd be better if you could set it so only group coordinators have the option to post public posts. When you select the option for a posts privacy to be either set public or private.

Interesting. What do you think @robertguthrie?

Or at least have that as an option for more privacy concerned groups.

@matthewnholt that's pretty interesting. It could be added quite easily. Have a look at the group settings page today, it's changed a bit more. You could imagine having a "Start public discussions" checkbox in the "members can" section.

I wonder if you would just have a "start discussions" option. So for a particular group only admins can start discussions. Members could still start discussions in subgroups if you wanted. That seems like a slightly simpler setting - would that be satisfactory? I like it because it sits along side a "members can start proposals" setting.

@richarddbartlett