Loom.io - Require Proposal to Start New Groups.
proposal by Sean Tilley Closed Fri 14 Sep 2012 3:44AM
For the sake of keeping order and preventing too many groups from starting up at once (as groups, at the moment, are purpose-driven), I think it would be sane to propose that if someone wants to start a subgroup for Diaspora Community, we should try to take a vote on its creation and necessity. (For example take a look at this proposal here: http://loom.io/discussions/694)
As a community, we owe it to ourselves to be as organized as we possibly can. That includes setting up workflows and policies to prevent clutter from overflowing on our boards of governance and decision-making.
Results
| Results | Option | Votes | % of votes cast | % of eligible voters | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agree | 8 | 67 | 8 |        | |
| Abstain | 1 | 8 | 1 |  | |
| Disagree | 2 | 17 | 2 |  | |
| Block | 1 | 8 | 1 | ||
| Undecided | 89 | 88 |             |
12 of 101 votes cast (11% participation)
altruism
Tue 11 Sep 2012 8:59PM
Not under the evaluation period. As a result of creating a new group we already have a good question to the Loomio team about how to move a discussion from one group to another.
Dave YinglingTue 11 Sep 2012 11:43PM
I would think that at this stage, "require" is too strong of a word. "Encourage" is more in line with my feelings.
Jeremy Huffman
Wed 12 Sep 2012 12:15AM
I agree if we are going to create groups to which we delegate certain tasks/decisions, the mission of the group should be agreed up-front.
Jason Robinson
Wed 12 Sep 2012 6:47PM
Sean, how would we control this? By access rights? I'd rather have moderators than a few super users.
So please can you fill the proposal to make it concrete on how to establish this? Does Loom.io support access levels or moving discussions?
Brent BartlettWed 12 Sep 2012 7:53PM
Too many groups invites chaos.
tortoiseWed 12 Sep 2012 9:39PM
Be a little more patient, allow for more people into the process, allow for plural voices, and deal with any problem once it comes up, instead of being afraid of problems before they happen.
Let people talk and see what happens.
tortoiseWed 12 Sep 2012 9:42PM
Be a little more patient, allow for more people into the process, allow for plural voices, and deal with any problem once it comes up, instead of being afraid of problems before they happen. Let people talk and see what happens.
goobTue 11 Sep 2012 8:53PM
Thanks, Sean. That's a very sensible idea. I've been getting a flood of emails over the past few days as people have started new groups/divisions etc, and there's already too much to deal with. Organised anarchy is better than complete anarchy, and I support your proposal.
altruism ·Tue 11 Sep 2012 8:53PM
Sean, are we not evaluating the platform? I do not think such restrictions are a good idea right now.