Member Categories
Chris Taklis PublicSeen by 83What i mean with member categories?
A group can have 2 different ways for members to participate and vote in discussions.
The one is to be all the members in main category and participate and vote for everything.
The second one is to create a sub-group, to invite only the members who want to participate and vote.
But i think it is missing a third category... A special category which you can have member categories, which you make it, for example you can have 3 members categories, which are public (for everyone), members and friends... and all those in each discussion in main group you can decide who is available to participate and/or vote.
Why i think this is good feature?
For one good reason... Think that you are an open group for everyone to participate in political discussions. But you want for internal discussions ( as constitution) to participate only members and not friends or those who are participating in other political party or group similar to yours.
How can this be done? (technical)
i think it is easy with a dropdown button when you start a discussion and tell who will participate (everyone, members, friends)...
But to be done this first you have to put some labels in members names.
Why not create a subgroup and discuss there in private?
Because for someone to join a subgroup is not always simple, someone maybe will have received an invitation and haven't come to the subgroup, and doesn't know about it. So we must give the option for someone to participate in discussion and voting as simple as can be, by only be member of main group...
p.s. I would like to hear opinions.
How does this fit into the "invite to discussion" designs already in progress? I know the vision is to someday be able to invite individuals, Loomio groups/subgroups, and other lists like facebook contacts or something to a discussion easily. I suppose it's a model like Google+ circles? I guess the layer Chris is suggesting here is then assigning different permissions to the different individuals and groups you are inviting in. We have discussed an "observer" class of users who can participate in a discussion but not a proposal, to represent different levels of stakeholding.
I love where you are going with this @richarddbartlett - the main shift for me is that a group is no longer a 'place' where a discussion/decision happens.
Instead Loomio is a place where discussions and decisions happen and groups are given access to participate in different ways.
This also opens the possibility of the group database living outside of Loomio (e.g. LDAP, facebook group, whatever) and you just have an auth layer that determines access levels.
Makes sense to me. I think it would also be useful if you could tag people related to their skills interest (assuming people added their skills to their profiles)
That way, say you want to do something that requires IT skills on loomio, if people with those skills added that to their profile you could click 'IT' in a drop box and have all those people automatically added.
It would also help for co-op organisations. For example you could get everyone who works in accounts or whatever without having to add them all individually or without being a member of the accounts sub-group (say you were in human resources sub-group but need to have a discussion involving both sub-groups.
Yep @joshuavial we're starting to think of groups as just a list of people. You can add extra things to a group like branding, permissions, and a profile to make it a place to host people.
any news about that??? will you make it???
I love this @christaklis.
From an implementation point of view, I think we can achieve this without creating 'member labels' exactly. Rather, I would just consider these to be a kind of subgroup. Then you would bring in different subgroups into one discussion, and give them different permissions.
I'm imagining something like:
Who can see this discussion?
Friends, Associates and Members
Who can participate in this discussion?
Associates and Members
Who can participate in this decision?
Shareholders