Loomio
Sat 14 Dec 2019 6:04AM

Collective working groups formation

P pospi Public Seen by 59

I think a big part of success in the early stages of a process like this is ensuring that everybody is clear about how they can contribute and are feeling excited about engaging with it. So I would like to take some time to get clarity and consent on this from each of us.

We currently have, per the Group Members gitbook page:

  • Marketing: Tom, Sid

  • Naming / branding: pospi, Jean, Sid

  • Purpose & vision statement: Jean, pospi, Sid

  • Ethical guidelines: Jean, pospi

  • Fund management: Noah, Tom

  • Protocol design: pospi, Bob

  • Economics design: Bob

  • Holochain Blog: Amanda DHT

So there are some things to tease out here as to the topics for working sub-groups that we federate into; as well as what is the work of this collective vs the work of connected partners.

I would like to start by figuring out who wants to be involved and how much; and move from there into formulating working groups to collaborate on particular topics. Note also that I have started to categorise threads in the Loomio group based on the topics being discussed.

NT

Noah Thorp Sat 14 Dec 2019 5:52PM

Roles make sense. I think we need working groups and a cadence for checkins. Probably small bi-weekly 15 min working group Standup’s and a big monthly facilitated group retro with next steps would be a good format? If there’s some support here I’ll make a new proposal to hash out the format.

D

dhtnetwork Sat 14 Dec 2019 3:19PM

Also, I'm currently enrolled in Seth Godin's The Marketing Seminar. It's a three month program that has changed the way I look at messaging, branding, positioning, communicating with groups.

P

pospi Mon 16 Dec 2019 12:00AM

Well, I'm not going to dictate to you (or anyone else) what I think you should do... it's up to you to decide your level of involvement! (;

I'm curious to hear from yourself and others what the governance / strategy aspects of these goals are. @Tom has some projects in the works that are essentially saying, "if you want to receive funding from this incubator then you need to use REA accounting so that we can track your performance with high fidelity". So I think there are some lightweight constraints and protocols to sketch out. But I think most of the actual "how do we track things" implementation will be technical rather than social. Could also branch out into roadmaps and which tools we prioritise the development of.

NT

Noah Thorp Sat 14 Dec 2019 5:57PM

I like the collaboration, communication and coordination framing. I suggest adding compensation :)

D

dhtnetwork Sat 14 Dec 2019 3:17PM

"Maybe Amanda's only involvement needs to be as an anonymous viewer so that she can keep tabs on the narratives we're weaving here." @pospi Happy to be engage in whatever level you see fit. My interest is tied to seeing how we can support this effort to understand what is required to help projects sustain and maintain. At an ecosystem level, I'm interested in how we can successfully track efforts, flows, and increase collaboration with other projects. On a personal level, I'm observing how this project could be a good case study in terms of collaboration/communication/coordination.

P

pospi Sat 14 Dec 2019 6:07AM

Given my current commitment levels and other projects going on, my realistic involvement level looks like this:

  • Responding to prompts from others in Loomio & Gitbook to keep the process moving; mostly in an asynchronous "trying to keep all the plates spinning" manner until such time as I feel I can let go of certain topics; and

  • Dedicating slices of time to work with a particular purpose or outcome (eg. creating content to address a particular governance concern), and working on those in sprints maintaining regular contact with others involved.