Burn the Hub Proposal

So humhub actually provides a couple things that loomio does not, namely document editing, storage, and task assignment. I think its a great idea to move to loomio as a decision making and discussion site, and a point of entry for folks to get involved (after the website). I also agree that humhub is not used as often as initially envisioned (and at some level thats ok). It needs to be cleaned up and simplified and its intended uses need to be defined and articulated.

The folks who made loomio suggested using three different platforms (i know its kind of a lot): one for chat (signal or riot), one for decisions (loomio), and one for doc storage (in our case, the hub).

This was part of the discussion at the web meeting tonight so it will be good to get connected and start improving these systems.

The idea isn't to completely get rid of these other means of communication, but that we have a set standard and point of entry to negate any future confusion. Basically getting people tapped in as quickly and easily as possible. Whether that's getting new members, or getting more people on subcommittees to divide up the work.

That was the exact discussion with @rigel last night.

Pretty much the idea is going to be that we'll have a "welcome" splash page on the site that starts off with a brief description of getting involved and then a quiz if you want to be placed that way (but also a bare bones contact form), then after a little "gigs" section where members/groups/orgs can post microtasks they need done that they don't mind having a stranger do, then below either an visual representation of the org and process flows for folks who want to drill into it, or just moving the NAC map to that page and adding GIS layers for resources being mapped.

I think a lot of folks have similar sentiments, but we're starting to define our tools well. I'll upload the slide we had from the presentation that talked about the tools, we can even take it to a vote through this platform.

Sounds like good work at the web group. I look forward to being able to plug in, in the future!

I made a proposal regarding standardizing on software tools and their purpose per our discussions (last night and over the past few months), check it out and see if it makes sense to you.

I also realized I didn't address email in that, but that's going to be the "fundamental" interaction level for folks (especially since Loomio interacts with email well, i.e. you can respond via email and it posts to the forum).

Is your proposal running through your NAC?

Nope, just in the Workshop at the moment, but I can take it through Montavilla NAC.

Seeing as it's a proposal for structuring proposal submissions on Loomio, it may be a bit wonky to its own process (but can be done anyway).

So to clarify, is this a proposal that got passed by the NE NAC?

Yes, but i am suggesting that we withdraw the proposal because clearly the web group has vision on this and the other standardization proposal covers these bases.

Yes, this proposal passed NE NAC. However it is redundant to have both this proposal and the one Jonathan posted. But there are concerns I expressed, which I believe NE NAC would agree with as we discussed these issues quite a lot. So I'll discuss redacting this proposal and amendments to the standardized proposal with NE. Let me know if there is a deadline for this