talkgroup

talkgroup audit (2020)

I’m gonna start a cycle of processing each talkgroup, discussing it’s purpose, freshening up descriptions, that sorta thing.

I’m sure there are some that will go away, which means figuring out what to do with the data, something I call the “end gayme” for a talkgroup. Because we should gamify it, of course.

Anyhow, everything is gonna go slow, I am going to ping everyone who might care, and we’ll make it better. :slight_smile:


Questions:

  • Does the talkgroup description need updating?
  • What happens to content?
  • Choose the color (including keeping it the same)
  • Changes to configuration?
    • Moderators
    • Permssions
    • Extras, like voting, wiki-by-default, auto-delete messages, etc.
  • Should it be muted by default?
1 Like

I would strongly want to never delete content. I am 100% fine with dumping it all in one category of “failed groups”.

You saying I can’t delete posts in #maiki? :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

It depends on the data. I’m more into moving knowledge into place. talkgroup is an app, the data is on a journey. :slight_smile:

It’s good to point out that part of this audit will be including instructions for each talkgroup on how it’s content is handled.

So, we probably have special clauses for #maiki and #tuna, for instance, that say we get to decide in our categories what happens; I’m presuming that makes sense, if not please point that out. :slight_smile:

For each talkgroup we are gonna discuss it! And we’ll figure out what happens to everything.

There is a redirect index feature in Discourse; one can set a URL to redirect to a new URL. My plan is to merge, bump, edit, forget about, and re-audit one day, until a piece of content is ready to go live somewhere else.

In the case of #maiki, those will eventually move into a read-only archive, probably at maiki.interi.org, when I’m good and ready. For #logs I thought I might propose a 10-year archive policy: after ten years a post gets frozen and moved to a static archive on a sub-domain (archive.talkgroup.xyz?).

In the case of #changelog, a lot of those were of use to me years ago, but no longer, and many have no comments. Those that do, their comments are the important thing, and those ought to live elsewhere (unless they don’t, because we don’t need to archive, “Huh.”? :thinking:)

This is what I mean by “it depends”. If a piece of content isn’t useful I ask if it can be edited to become useful, or if it can be safely tossed. And of course the applies to the “commons”, not any personal talkgroup which is it’s own thing.

Also, this should be clear for new talkgroups, and especially what I hope will develop: group talkgroups (either private or public), where it is made clear how the posts will be handled.

Aside: we could have #borrowers for tracking a library of items, and a new #buy-nothing for ephemeral posts that move goods and then auto-delete, as an example of how similar talkgroups can operate on different motives. :slight_smile:

Okay, glad to get that out of my head!

@tim, an example of something I’d toss: WooCommerce 2.6.13 fix release notes

1 Like

That makes total sense to me! All of it.

1 Like

The lowest hanging fruit: #changelog, because we already decided to delete it. :slight_smile:

There are only 30 posts, so I’m going to move any commentary to a more appropriate talkgroup and will delete the links without commentary.

My net connection is really spotty most days. Using talkgroup is a chore, I just have super high latency.

Anyhow, rather than process all the message that only I posted in, I moved them in bulk to either #gaming, #scitech, or #webcraft. Now they can be deleted in those respective talkgroups. :slight_smile:

I go to https://talkgroup.xyz/latest?ascending=true&order=activity and to kinda figure out the oldest talkgroups.

Okay, #logs. About topic: About the Logs category

It’s kinda funny, actually:

Log stuff. Here.

Sorry, that’s a verb, and commanding : Log stuff! Here!

Subscribe to the category and get daily emails that you can reply to. For reals!

The questions:

  • Does the description need updating?
  • What happens to content?
  • Choose the color (including keeping it the same)
  • Changes to configuration? (moderators, permissions, oddities {like voting})
  • Should it be muted by default?

Oh, I’ll add these to the topic, and we can add more questions there to answer. :slight_smile:

Okay, #logs, go!

Re: #logs

I’d say yes, but after we’ve answered all the other questions. I want to let folks express themselves, balanced against a standardized template, well, checklist, really. Something like:

  • Describe the talkgroup
  • Link to topic or usernames for contact
  • Link to offsite resources (personal websites, jabber conferences, etc.)

Logs is such a big deal talkgroup, I’m compelled to be more verbose in onboarding users; we’re doing collective, public journaling, we’ll go the farthest with the most people, so designing an easy introduction will serve our purpose well. :slight_smile:

Well… I figure at the least we can make some sorta vague promise that we will archive it eventually.

See, I don’t quite know. I plan on copying my logs elsewhere eventually, as a personal record. But at this point I don’t know how much of my personal record is also your personal record. Some of you folks, I’ll copy your logs as well, to provide context.

This deserves some discussion. As it is, there is no end to this talkgroup, and I’m not sure how sustainable that is.

I’ve noticed I choose all the colors and I choose a lot of orange, so if logs out to be different, let me know! I think we can use any color hex.

I don’t think any changes are required at the moment. Is everyone able to use logs okay? It makes sense? Whatever doesn’t make sense, we cover in the description topic! :slight_smile:

I don’t know. It’s fairly human-readable (opposed to “firehose”), since we tend to focus on single day topics. I’d be fine with it being unmuted, it seems like an easy to way to find other, currently active users and engage with them, and maybe that’s very useful in a world using all it’s tricks to get us! :grimacing:

1 Like

But maiki, isn’t that like, the exact stuff we want them to look at, other humans sharing details of themselves in a friendly, chatty environment? Well, yes and no. We like being social. But that isn’t social, that’s parenting-by-TV. I introduce people, send them invites to others’ intros, send PMs with groups of folks that ought to talk. I even text links all over the place, so folks find info that is useful to them.

I want to actively subvert the impulse to stream everything to anyone. I want to be intentional, even with how we present ourselves to folks that have already arrived. We are training them, just as every other interface they use. We can train to be intentional, slow, thoughtful, playful, social. That’s what I’m thinking.

OMG, I’m gonna use this for talkgroup audit (2020). But for talkgroups. I’m sure it will need tweaking, but it’s kinda what I’m going for, on reflection. :slight_smile:

1 Like

Okay, let’s see if any of these questions make sense for talkgroups, with the intent to invite participation.

This makes sense, and should be covered in a talkgroups description (personal talkgroups might get away with being more arcane; or perhaps each talkgroup chooses it’s own level of invitation to participate).

Yes, this should be a point: if a talkgroup wants folks to do something, explain it and make it easy. I say this knowing I’ve written all these descriptions without calls to action. :slight_smile:

For talkgroups this means breaking the prior step into discrete actionable tasks.

Not as applicable, as talkgroups are channels that support efforts (though some talkgroups are the sole expression of an effort). If it isn’t apparent which kinds of activities or skillsets happen in a talkgroup, it could be explained.

Matters for some talkgroups, which will have either “ownership groups” or community moderators (and in many senses these will serve as the same function, being that talkgroup.xyz is essentially a friend-of-a-friend network it doesn’t come into play as often.

However, I’m the least qualified to comment on this. I don’t believe I provide strong leadership on any projects here, I’m just slow and smart, an incredibly frustrating boundary to participation. :grimacing:

Maybe talkgroups as channels means the effort is where strong leadership matters, not really the meta of a talkgroup.

I hope this is self-evident, but perhaps we can use a standard line reminding everyone everything is public conversation (and also when it isn’t!).

talkgroups can be these things. I like to link to other resources from the about topic. Other talkgroups (think of the overlap between #mediaclub and #gaming, or #webcraft, #scitech, and #digital-safety), jabber conferences, websites, federated media accounts, those sorta things.

At first I’m like, aw, I so am not good at celebrating achievements. It’s part of “not a strong leader”. But then I thought: maybe just discussing topics as we close them, and our liberal use of fun badges fills in that spot. I mean, it’s entirely possible maiki started talkgroup as an augmented reality game, but is too lazy to commit…

:crazy_face:

1 Like

I was answering your point, so at the time I didn’t mention: damn dawg, that’s cold! (But only maybe because I have made most of them, historically; maybe someone else will reign supreme at “failed groups”!)

:rofl:

1 Like