Follow Public Group
Steven Palmer PublicSeen by 126> The Contributors’ subgroup is for the day-to-day operational decision-making of the co-op. To maximise transparency, discussions in this group are public by default.
This group is public, but I cannot follow this group unless I..
- Create a bookmark or
- Ask to Join (could be denied access / not sure if appropriate to join as non-contributor)
I would like to view Public groups by simply clicking 'follow'.
Great idea. I think what Steven is suggesting sounds perfect.
Option to follow Public Groups
proposal by Steven Palmer Closed Fri 2 May 2014 1:01PM
Strong support for this feature, but some are unsure how well it can be integrated.
The "Ask to Join" feature of Public Groups is useful as it increases transparency of an otherwise Private Group or membership control of an otherwise Open Public Group.
However, it seems nonsensical that in order to follow discussions you can already view, you need to 'Ask to Join'.
Therefore I propose a 'Follow' option for Public Groups.
Results
| Results | Option | Votes | % of votes cast | % of eligible voters | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agree | 13 | 81 | 5 |           | |
| Abstain | 3 | 19 | 1 |   | |
| Disagree | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Block | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| Not voted | 259 | 94 |     .png){kind=small}      |
Appears common sense.
I think this is a good idea! It should be included in the more general update to how tracking discussions you're following works, that Jon is working on.
It would be great to have a simple way to 'follow' public groups or discussions without creating work for the coordinators processing 'join' requests from people who only want to follow.
I like the spirit of this, but I do have some concerns about how to keep things simple and not give too many options (as Sam highlighted). I'll give this some more thought.
I think you have highlighted an important pain point.
I think this is very similar to a concept of 'following' discussions & groups generally. I would prefer to see that system as a whole designed/ developed rather than a small part of the solution
Makes lots of sense to me
what if instead of adding a new 'follow' option, you are by default following when you ask to join a Public \group? if your request is approved you will be able to contribute as well
i agree but if it's complicated to implement or you want people to be more participative, a solution would be to become follower when you ask to join a Public group. if your request is approved you will be able to contribute as well
i haven't seen a good explanation of how this will fit coherently into the overall model yet, so i'm gonna sit back.
As people become interested in an increasing number of groups on Loomio, most of us will probably find there is a small core of groups we want to actively 'join' and contribute to, and a much larger number of groups whose public discussion we want to follow, because they are relevant to our core groups.
in general, the goal makes sense. i have a concern, though - how would this factor into the existing notifications? i haven't really grokked the full model here yet, but the cost with any addition such as this is that it could create a there-is-more-than-one-way-to-do-it situation with certain notifications. such overlaps add complexity to the interaction model, which has a broader cost.
i'm not saying that's the case here - just hoping that someone with a more rigorous understanding of the overall notifications/groups model is considering that possibliity.
@jonlemmon can you explain how "watching" will work in terms of this?
FYI: The current iteration of the privacy rethink has join without approval for public groups.. which comes pretty close to following.
I share the concern expressed by @samboyer about how users find and access discussions across the various groups they have joined/ followed. I have occasionally looked at the new 'inbox' page, but to be honest I find it quicker and easier to use the 'Home' page to browse recent activity across groups, or use the 'Groups' drop-down to go straight to a (sub)group and see if there's any new activity there. The 'inbox' button would be more useful to me if it did the same thing as scrolling up to the top of any page and clicking 'Home'.
BTW I do find myself using 'Search' more and more. Thanks for adding this feature.
@strypey the concept of inbox is not finished. The intention is that it just shows discussions which you have participated in or been mentioned in.
Thanks @robertguthrie that makes a lot of sense, and would make that feature much more helpful. Is this related to the concept I’ve seen discussed of being ‘in the room’? For example, will I be able to remove a discussion from the inbox to show that I’ve ‘left the room’ and no longer have an active interest in the discussion? If so, how would those still active in the discussion know that I've 'left the room'?
yep.. in the room is a list of people subscribed to the convo.. meaning it's in their inbox.
I like @zack's suggestion, but what if I have no interest in joining a group? Say I've been asked to read it's discussions and summarize them for another group I'm in? Or what if it's an invite-only group which decides to make its discussions a matter of the public record?
Would it be possible to allow users to join certain groups by default on signup - through modifying a few things out of the box with loomio?
@frankenmint how would you imagine that working?
For example - an 'all users' category subgroup that everyone has the privledge to post to. The other groups would be considered private and a mod would need to allow entry towards them for use (or perhaps they would be granted permission to join those groups automatically after 20 posts)
I think this is a good idea. @jonlemmon how will the upcoming watching feature work with public groups you're not a member of?