Alternative uses for proposals - examples in the wild

I see several basic issues here. Perhaps the key fact is that proposals are supposed to be 'one-dimensional' propositions, suggesting a range of opinions along a single axis from positive to negative (full agreement to full disagreement.) I think that that basically gets to the heart of decision-making. Roll calls, engagement checks and RSVPs are basically one-dimensional, too, but polls are not. I don't know if we can have a reasonably focused discussion on all of these subjects in the same thread, but I'll share some of my thoughts.

Roll calls and engagement checks seem pretty similar. I suggest that the green thumb may be the only good 'clickable' answer for these subjects. It's possible for people to state other things, of course, such as "No", "I'll get to it ASAP" or "Sorry, I suck" (lol)-- but people can express such things personally in the topic's discussion/comments section. If a person does has some 'excuse' or explanation--or, if they were unaware of something which others expected-- it should probably be personalized interaction, instead of a 'carbon copy' answer. I think this facilitates efficient focus on getting stuff done.

With RSVPs, by contrast, there are three normal positions: Yes/No/Maybe. It's a different kind of interaction. Problems can arise if people use an RSVP as a decision-making tool: for instance, by creating the RSVP just to see if someone's suggested meeting is okay (or tolerable) for others. If the person making such suggestions is an official coordinator or facilitator, they may hold much informal power by controlling the options (or lack of options) which a group is presented with. That's a very deep tendency in group process. I think there are ways to distribute such power. Generally speaking, I think it's better for coordinators of meetings to use a relatively open tool such as Doodle, which enables a group to collectively see which options look best-- regardless of who ultimately decides on a specific meeting time.

So, I think that roll calls, engagement checks and RSVPs are all basically one-dimensional interactions, but perhaps another type of interaction (such as Doodle) should precede an RSVP. Also, none of these processes literally supports all of Agree/Abstain/Disagree/Block. I don't think that that's a big problem. Ideally however, I would indeed favor different options for the "Create a Proposal" field, such as Roll Call and possibly RSVP as well.

Polling is another story. I doubt I've read all of the extensive Loomio Community discussions on such matters. I understand that the upcoming "Ideas" feature will provide some informal 'temperature check" functionality which is, I think, softly and organically analogous to polling. Many complex concepts relate to the difference between one-dimensional proposals and polling. I echo @alanna 's concerns about polls, but I'm interested in current views among the community and the development team.

Thanks @gregorycassel - I think you've captured it pretty well.

I guess what's I'm sensing is people might want to use the current decision pane for various other functions. For example, embedding a Cobudget, Doodle, or collaborative document. We're going to start looking at how plugins could work with Loomio, and I'm still not clear about my own thoughts on if it's a good idea to have that flexibility, or if that will take Loomio away from being a tool purely focused on collaborative decision-making.

I don't want us to try to become a tool for every kind of collaboration, because there are many other platforms that do that already, and no one focusing really clearly on decision-making in the same way. At the same time, there are all kinds of collaborative engagement that go into supporting good decision-making as a group.

I wish I could 'like' this part twenty times, @alanna : "I don’t want us to try to become a tool for every kind of collaboration, because there are many other platforms that do that already, and no one focusing really clearly on decision-making in the same way."

Perhaps we should step back for a 'macro' look here. Is there an unidentified elephant in the roomio? Do many people desire for Loomio to be the online organizational tool for a given group? (I'll admit that I considered it myself, at times.) If not, then how could or should Loomio integrate with stuff such as Trello, BigMarker, dedicated websites, and other software?

I still feel kind of new to Loomio, but in addition to using it for informal groups, I'm thinking that any significant ongoing organization--which accumulates its own culture-- will find it advantageous to have at least one other online hub. In my case, I desire for Loomio to be the main center of online dialogue and action, but to generate content for a website, which will become an organized repository and also a portal for public engagement.

Perhaps that is enough, for many organizations: Loomio + a reasonably well-organized website. Loomio Cooperative seems to make good use of Trello, and probably other stuff too. Doodle's a fine tool, and I think Cobudget will probably be huge. (Thanks Enspiral!)

Many software tools, including wordpress and facebook groups, already offer polling features (either natively or through plug-ins.) If polling is to be thought of as a very informal thing for genuinely consensus-based decision-making, then perhaps the "Ideas" feature is just about as close to polling as Loomio should get. For instance, I could easily make a poll elsewhere and introduce the results to a Loomio discussion. Right now, that seems like a reasonably appropriate division of software labor to me.

These kinds of issues emerge when groups make Loomio their main online home as a community. I'm part of several groups where this is the case. In order to make communications accessible, groups naturally want to use the fewest tools and channels to serve their purpose. Perhaps the most important aspect of collaborative group comms is having critical mass on at least one channel so you have a reliable way to reach everyone. Loomio isn't really built for this (so far) and groups tend to get overwhelmed by noise because notifications are tuned for most Loomio comms being for decision-making (such as sending out an email for each proposal, the power of which is abrogated by people raising non-decision proposals to hack the system).

Of course we need to remain laser-focused on facilitating decision-making, since that's why Loomio exists. But at the same time, we want groups to be able to make Loomio their online community home, and have it become a critical collaboration channel for them. I think Loomio actually needs to serve both purposes well, and doing one well without tripping up the other is a design challenge.

I think the best way we can serve decision-making remaining focused, and avoid information overload, is not to try to stamp out the creative ways users are hacking the current features to meet their needs, but proactively provide them useful alternatives that don't, for example, trigger massive amounts of notifications for non-decision events, or muddy the meaning of the statement of position buttons by making people redefine them in an awkward way.

I think it would be fantastic if Loomio can evolve to be the main interactive communications tool for a robust and resilient organization, even if that organization uses other hubs (such as a website, Trello etc) for other purposes.

I feel great that exist and be taken to the practice, alternative options for the use of the proposals because they make more practical use of Loomio without other tools and possibly enhance the participation of group members, to the expand functions.

On slide 49 and 50 Loomio tutorial that I made, I refer to two of the options discussed by Alanna
https://www.loomio.org/d/uH9tYKys/pdf-loomio-tutorial-en-espanol-basico-anexo-i

I consider that expanding the functions of the proposal is not being diverted initial and primary purpose of the proposal as it is deliberative decision, the work group members is facilitated without changing tools

There may be mistakes in my interpretation of the theme, is by translations

I noticed the roll call usage while I was browsing discussions and I thought it was pretty cool, because I've used Trello for that and it was a little bit of a pain. I'd assign everyone to a card and tell them to unassign themselves when they've done it, which has the upside that only the ones who need to hear it get notified when we comment on the card, and the downsides that someone has to assign every relevant person and then check that they unassign themselves, which in my experience they didn't.

Loomio could be better for this if there was a type of discussion that stops notifying you once you've decided. I think allowing arbitrary relabeling of the colors would let people use majority rules voting instead of learning the value "block," but allowing decisions vs roll calls might be ok. I thought it was cool how people used a non-green color to say "I tried to do this but couldn't, help." Like "block" in voting, "I'm stuck" is a response to a roll call that is important but usually not formally available.

Great insight @presley ! Thanks for sharing that.

Hilariously, I just had a conversation with @mixirving about how he's tired of using Loomio's for role calls and decided to move to Trello with a system of assigning everyone to a card and telling them to unassign themselves when they'd done the thing.

Arg! I guess a lot of people are facing the same problem.

I have mixed feelings about a razor-sharp focus on decision making. The vast majority of our long-term (6 months+) successful groups have used the proposal feature fewer than 10 times (!).

I'm wondering whether it would make sense to slightly broaden our focus — I think of Loomio as a way of helping groups act together. Sometimes that will involve something that feels like a decision, sometimes not.
@derekrazo

@matthewbartlett can you please indicate if column #1 there indicates groups which have had 0-9 proposals? (Is that exactly how the 0/10/20 divisions work in this chart?)