Janina won’t join in because another weekly call would be too much for her. She would still be interested to follow the process occasionally.
what’s still to be done to get the release ready?
some more bugs to fix, especially in the app
Tilmann hopes to get around to it in the following days
More coworking?
Nick and Tais might arrive in Kanthaus middle of next week, then more co-working might be happening
Toy library in Gothenburg as potential new group
they are interested but also not decided
Bruno is lobbying hard…^^
so far he didn’t go into the anti-proprietary software topic but he probably will in the future if they want to go for facebook groups
small side discussion about ‘The social dilemma’ (summary: good documentary, but very American. Still worth showing/recommending to people who are not in the topic at all.)
Governance features vs. generalization
Tilmann points out that it’s a competition in terms of developer time
should be discussed in the group where more motivation lies
does it make sense to jump from topic to topic or is it better to stick to one?
personal ways of working differ, maybe both can be done - but then slower
it’s mostly about Nick since Tilmann can’t find the time to tackle big tasks right now
Bruno feels that the much more structured way of moving forward with the governance topic gives it a head-start
check-out
2. Actions/Outcomes
3. Next
Next meeting: 2020-10-11 12:00 (UTC+2)
Next facilitator: Bruno
Where: Jitsi Meet
idea to put a poll in the forum and ping the groups:
pick top 3 or 4
options:
Pickup
Meeting
Task
Event
Distribution
Sharing
Dropoff
Shift
vote for any (“approval vote”)
Problem of how to go about a pickup that requires people to go to two different places?
for now it’s probably best to simply create it as one pickup in one place and write a big comment
the other possibility would be to make two places and two pickups and then write a big comment that you should always sign up for both but that’s probably more complicated
in the future there could be events that are independent of locations, but that requires bigger refactoring and rearchitecturing
… been playing with frontend data stuff
Nick aiming to at least write up assessment of existing architecture
could include a link to a forum post to explain it and provide a place for discussion
could do with a name filter
is actually part of governance, as the idea is instead implementing complex rules we present information to be used in human processes
making places more friendly for discussion
more like a channel on slack/rocketchat
multiple channels?
how to make it easier to find important conversations
chat vs forums…
rocketchat has channels, discussions, threads, but generally is a bit confusing!
also relates to governance topics, as it’s where governance discussions happen, working groups…
maybe could be worth a whole community design process for it
balance of small fixes vs bigger questions
playground group is now closed
need to keep an eye on the applications for it
not sure whether people get removed from inactivity
question about who gets which notifications under which conditions for applications
seems to be designed for small groups to make sure no application gets forgotten, but for bigger groups it’s a bit weird if everyone gets notified by default
Bruno might write an issue
check-out
2. Actions/Outcomes
Write about interviews for the governance design process (Bruno)
Do some interviews with closer people if desired (Nick, anyone)
was a very clear gender split between who mentioned feeling bad for not doing enough stuff! (you can guess in which direction…)
not feeling bad for not doing enough stuff
hard to get started if it feels like it’s too big topic for a short time, leading to not opening chat/etc as it’ll lead to feeling bad
a lot of desire to work on karrot, even if lots of stuff going on, joining social bit is good for stimulating motivation, welcoming culture to not feel pressured makes it feel pleasant
how to motivate people without risking being pushy? asking people can be useful! but where to draw line
requests to look at a focused specific issue can help with the issue of topics being too big or overwhelming, clear tasks
nick tried mention little tasks tilmann might be able to do whilst baby sleeping (~2h)
sometimes having a smaller task leads to a big topic, hard to achieve anything
should be clear there is never a need to do the whole big thing
karrot months were great before for adding major features, focused time in person, were historically the times when major new features were added
hopefully the design process is something like that, but a spread out version
NordiCHI impressions
didn’t feel so productive, but not just because of conference
too structured and rushed, not enough space for free conversations in smaller groups
technical issues caused Bruno to have to leave
connected with interesting person who had some nice relevant research (asked for paper, and invited to meeting, they also joined karrot)
good thing is to create some specific actions from the conference
+1 for quite rushed
can have nice interesting discussions, but easy to not do something afterwards
+1 for the same nice interesting person (Philip also contacted them I think)
person = Vasileios
connections with Oliver Bates, interested in getting back to food related projects
some focus more on for-profit co-operatives, which is a bit less aligned with us
+2 to overly structured and rushed! maybe would have read papers beforehand if knew that, also had to take notes…
confused what the aim was, concrete outcomes? (didn’t really happen) networking? (not enough time/space for that). clearer intentions would have helped. ended up not doing so much of either. felt a bit of waste of time, even though interesting.
hopefully inspired by us and more will come out of through contacts, hope! we’ll see
was a nice peaceful time with baby-boo
in academic world nothing is specific about networking, but everything is… social component not acknowleged enough
biggest debate was about when/where to spend to break … maybe everything should have been the break
with in person conference, the social bit would have been much more valuable, coffee/dinner to go more into depth, hard to replicate in online setting
+1 to redicuoulous break time debate
curiosity about academic stuff
nice connection with academia <-> karrot <-> grassroots projects
feedback bit inside workshop didn’t work … asking for feedback, but no space to give it!
maybe we can give some feedback?
found runup to the NordiCHI confusing, not quite aligned for non-academics
can we reuse the workshop paper for something? maybe Philip would develop it further into a paper (normal process is to start with workshop paper, get feedback then work it into a real one…)
Tilmann would put our workshop paper in forum, and link it on mastodon
idea to organise a workshop about foodsharing/saving specific, connected with ? <— I missed the name (link coming!) deadline in February (for proposing a workshop, thing itself in july or something)
CHI is so broad, hard to get proposal accepted
Communities and Technologies: https://2021.comtech.community/ (C&T’s 2021 theme “Wicked Problems in the Age of Tech”, invites participants to examine the positive and negative implications of new trends in Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) impacting communities, civil society and the common good.)
governance process updates
almost done with stage 1! (define the challenge), should be done by next meeting
stage 2 is sketching/investigating solutions
feeling it is going really well! felt like it had opened up a lot, but came together last week
each done interviews, felt really productive
next part is merging the maps/challenges
interesting how “might it be” parts
opening it up to more people to get clear statements, and more concrete way forward
up to this point it’s been quite abstract, but from here should be more straightward for others to contribute
outcome of it should hopefully have a clear focus, but also some subsequent tasks we can focus on
screencast updates
Taïs has started on them! 2 of them are done, posting into Screencast discussion in rocketchat
happy for feedback on scripts + finished videos, feedback is most useful at script level before having made it
open for people writing scripts to be read out, quite important to make sure it’s how karrot actually works!
where to publish them? should be very user friendly (as target is people possibly daunted by computers), hopefully have a playlist, and be able to jump to specific sections of the video
maybe actually find a landing page one, or something directly integrated, should feel part of the platform… or community forum?
embeddable could be nice, so we can put it in various places?
idea about landing page video for more general context, more PR than tutorial video though, nice little drawings, etc…
important to get the videos online as soon as possible for feedback, just on community forum is fine for now
in Stockholm, new people come via facebook, would be nice to share with members
need to think about the different channels people arrive into karrot
new category in community forum for tutorial videos, one thread per video
how to get it into other languages? multiple levels of difficulties (whether karrot needs to be in the other language too, or if it’s a barrier), in Stockholm it’s a lot of international people, both maybe in Gothenburg more in Swedish
subtitle options? maybe support community to make translations
French people get very scared and need everything in French (oooh lala)
scripts could be uploaded as file to community forum, or in github? main goal is not too technical, just a way to few content clearly
maybe having the video project files themselves somewhere?
maybe someone wants their little face in the corner? more different faces would be nice! make it feel more accessible to participate
frontend is still in review, mostly about translation topics, this change is also changing pickup → activity for the generic cases, it’s a time we can choose to simplify/rationalize the text, maybe people will be confused about the word “activity”
confusing to have “Activity” as a general type (although that’s only used for non-foodsaving groups, so maybe not needed to address now?), another name, maybe Bruno can suggest if needed, as bikekitchen is needed
2nd year of PhD, interested in grassroots sharing economy initiatives that use physical spaces while using digital tools to facilitate that real world activity
conceptual approach in how things are designed
follows participatory action research, would like to also take part in a foodsharing initiative
currently, after they have done the 3 trial pickups, they apply to karrot and get accepted
Gothenburg do 2 trial pickups, and co-ordinate in the application chat with a welcoming team, takes some time (days) without an answer as needs to wait for people to find some time to bring a applicant along… nice to bring along 2 applicants to 1 trial pickup, but very hard this way…
also relates to public places maybe? (making it easier for people to join more open things, like events)
3 trust carrots needed so far, or less for smaller groups
combination of trust system + number of trial pickups to upgrade?
goes into much wider topics of user levels and permissions, but quite complicated
how are trust carrots used in luxemboug currently? no special agreement, when people are motivated to create new places, they make an announcement to ask for more trust for them! is it misuse? maybe not!
trust is a very general term, rather than specific about doing something, maybe could have been rephrased, “approval”? maybe trust + context is more useful…
trust system + context is maybe even like a lightweight voting system
applicant → newcomer → trusted → (another level for editing)
maybe prompting users more to give trust in more places
if we use only trust system to get trusted then they might not have done trial pickups
how should trial pickups + trust interact?
maybe can actually leave trust out initially? and just do focus on the number of trial activities needed, set per group
for each activity be able to have another slider for how many trial pickups
maye trust system enhancements come later on reflection
maybe a new role to distinguish them from newcomer, and editor… trusted? editor is detirmined by trust system alone currently… maybe keeping these seprate is ok
so, feeling to keep trust + editor role seperate from trial activity + trusted activity role.
before people have done trial activities they would still be able to see all the discussions, is that ok?
continue this discussion/process on the forum, some sketches, etc… will likely schedule a follow-up call on there
ux problems, especially with the elderly
not a clear issue in mind right now
the videos help! they made one in luxembourghish
maybe some more potential for collaboration, co-operation, translations, subtitles, etc for the videos
seems to have support for trying it out! and using the plugin
the random new groups (nick)
how do we know when we need the next step of making sure the new groups are legit?
how do we decide whether a groups is “legit”?
misunderstanding of what the software is is clear case
but just using it differently to our intention is less clear what we want
two basic cases?
people are confused about the software and creating groups
if it’s polluting the group gallery, it somehow needs to be dealt with
improve our communication and outreach mechanisms to help with that
Bruno applied to a few to see what they say, but no replies so far
current situation with Brazilian education groups, not so bad right now as they don’t appear on the map
in this case translating the landing page into Brazillian Portuguese would help
illegitimate cases
e.g. really bad shit totally against our values
need to work on this more broadly
developing clear code of conduct / terms of service / whatever
how to actually check? manual check?
what might be a next minimal feature for this?
maybe keep a bit of weekly meeting to discuss a little bit each time to discuss values/golden rules, and maybe in the governance design process
collect keywords? new ideas? small brainstorm
helps make a nice base to work from when time for more people to participate is available
having weekly gives us a bit of time to reflect in between (not a sprint!), allows background brain processing whilst washing the dishes (it could be when hanging the laundry)
proposal to assign a fixed agenda point
a karrot gathering in the summer!
no immediate need
Feedback on use of conflict resolution from Solikyl
two conflicts, one finished, one ongoing
some discussions occured about the feature itself, how it gets used in the group
first conflict was based on a phone call where they were talking past each other, some slight racist slur occured, so seems worth going into a process
second one, has a lot of support, but also a lot of opposing views. they were not comfortable with the conflict process being open to the whole group, even from a legal perspective
brought up by other people, perhaps it exposes the person too much, especially in bigger groups, they feel they’re being watched
they have a meeting, some notes to follow up with
some specific ideas to improve the conflict resolution feature
maybe more steps? like first involving just the two people? then adding more as needed… and maybe only go to voting when the first levels didn’t work…
toxic mindset to use feature for pointing fingers rather than constructive dialog and solutions, sad thing! … but how much is the software part of it?
foodsharing people had feared our karrot model would lead to it, too visible, too public, not protected enough (esp. of those falsely accused)
multiple level approach seems to have potential! message between two at first
finding people to mediate! (they need to trust them, feel comfortable, or they are some kind of authority)
people naturally contact some of the more “authorative seeming” people, the overwhelming them…
would be nice if we all had the energy for mediation, as it’s nesercery
previously they tried to encourage people to start resolution processes, but maybe got too much now!
so maybe a way forward is finding ways to distribute mediation amoungst the team, or support people to join/form a team that will be up for it
differentiating between two cases
mediation will be helpful
somebody did a bad thing and needs to punished by the rules!
(Philip also contacted them I think)
… asking for feedback, but no space to give it!