Loomio Community - Product Development

Wed 19 Mar 2014 10:50PM

Feature update: new group privacy settings

Robert Guthrie Public Seen by 243

Yesterday we released a whole new system for managing the privacy of your groups. Now when you start a new Loomio group, you’ll get the following options:

Open access groups
As part of this feature, we’ve released the first version of ‘open access groups’. Setting your group to ‘open’ means that any Loomio user can join in immediately, without needing an invitation or approval.

New options, new language
We’ve tried to provide a comprehensive set of options without being too confusing. What do you think? Could it be clearer? We’ve had some really great feedback from the community to get to this point – we’d love you to join the conversation if you have anything to add.

Poll Created Mon 26 May 2014 12:27AM

The language for the new group settings page makes sense to me Closed Thu 29 May 2014 12:09AM

Outcome

by Richard D. Bartlett Mon 27 Feb 2017 10:26PM

Thanks for your input everyone, this update will be out soon :)

Latest version here: https://i.imgur.com/14ubHjm.png

Results

Results	Option	% of points	Voters
	Agree	83.3%	10
	Abstain	16.7%	2
	Disagree	0.0%	0
	Block	0.0%	0
	Undecided	0%	263

12 of 275 people have participated (4%)

Vote removed

Alanna Irving

Mon 26 May 2014 12:31AM

much better!

vivien maidaborn

Mon 26 May 2014 6:20AM

from the pov of teaching this it is great language easy to understand

A. Renato

Mon 26 May 2014 4:08PM

better!

Josef Davies-Coates

Tue 27 May 2014 1:58PM

well, yes, they do make sense

Benjamin Knight

Wed 28 May 2014 1:18AM

huge improvement!

Jon Lemmon

Wed 28 May 2014 4:34AM

Ambiguity: If the group is "members only" can someone with a link to it see it? If not, you may want to change the wording to "Who can see this group?" instead of "Who can find this group?".

mix irving

Wed 28 May 2014 6:00AM

quite good. The middle two are a little unclear perhaps. What is the diff between joining and adding ?

I think 'Adding members' means approving requests to join and sending active invites/ adding people manually?

see comments for more

Poll Created Mon 26 May 2014 12:27AM

The language for the new group settings page makes sense to me Closed Thu 29 May 2014 12:09AM

Outcome

by Richard D. Bartlett Mon 27 Feb 2017 10:26PM

Thanks for your input everyone, this update will be out soon :)

Latest version here: https://i.imgur.com/14ubHjm.png

Results

Results	Option	% of points	Voters
	Agree	83.3%	10
	Abstain	16.7%	2
	Disagree	0.0%	0
	Block	0.0%	0
	Undecided	0%	263

12 of 275 people have participated (4%)

Vote removed

Alanna Irving

Mon 26 May 2014 12:31AM

much better!

vivien maidaborn

Mon 26 May 2014 6:20AM

from the pov of teaching this it is great language easy to understand

A. Renato

Mon 26 May 2014 4:08PM

better!

Josef Davies-Coates

Tue 27 May 2014 1:58PM

well, yes, they do make sense

Benjamin Knight

Wed 28 May 2014 1:18AM

huge improvement!

Jon Lemmon

Wed 28 May 2014 4:34AM

Ambiguity: If the group is "members only" can someone with a link to it see it? If not, you may want to change the wording to "Who can see this group?" instead of "Who can find this group?".

mix irving

Wed 28 May 2014 6:00AM

quite good. The middle two are a little unclear perhaps. What is the diff between joining and adding ?

I think 'Adding members' means approving requests to join and sending active invites/ adding people manually?

see comments for more

Josef Davies-Coates Mon 26 May 2014 11:47AM

small comment really but I just read this about where best to put placeholder text/ tips, i.e. outside of the form field:
http://goo.gl/QKt7xq

Josef Davies-Coates Tue 27 May 2014 12:09PM

er, more cool stuff on placeholders here
http://blog.circleci.com/adaptive-placeholders/

(the guys at http://www.camplight.net/ must be into this stuff at the mo because both links are from their facebook page https://www.facebook.com/camplight )

Benjamin Knight Wed 28 May 2014 1:17AM

I really like @alanna's suggestion about Open group, By request, and Invitation only - feels like a really clear articulation of the 3 options (and gives each a label to make it instantly understandable).

Also love @jessedoud 's suggestion about making it clear to people that these settings can be changed.

This is awesome work @robertguthrie , massive improvement!!

Benjamin Knight Wed 28 May 2014 1:18AM

Plus I love hacking the proposal to engage us all in the process :)

Philippe Ponge Wed 28 May 2014 3:12AM

It's a little bit difficult for me to answer because my english is not very good.
It'll be usefull and maybe interesting to make traductions, and to verify them if people are able and have time to do it.

Thanks for Loomio it's realy a good way for me to take decision after proposition.

Jon Lemmon Wed 28 May 2014 4:37AM

See vote statement. Looks really good though. :)

mix irving Wed 28 May 2014 6:09AM

here's my go :

Philippe Ponge Wed 28 May 2014 11:31PM

Thanks a lot for this button Traduction
So quickly... it's help me already even if the traduction is not so good, specialy when we work on detaiIs.
Yo ;.)

Richard D. Bartlett Tue 3 Jun 2014 10:06PM

Hey folks we deployed these changes last night - have a play and let us know if you have any feedback :)

Matt H Fri 6 Jun 2014 5:06PM

I think it'd be better if you could set it so only group coordinators have the option to post public posts. When you select the option for a posts privacy to be either set public or private.

Richard D. Bartlett Sun 8 Jun 2014 9:46PM

Interesting. What do you think @robertguthrie?

Matt H Tue 10 Jun 2014 11:30PM

Or at least have that as an option for more privacy concerned groups.

Robert Guthrie Wed 11 Jun 2014 12:28PM

@matthewnholt that's pretty interesting. It could be added quite easily. Have a look at the group settings page today, it's changed a bit more. You could imagine having a "Start public discussions" checkbox in the "members can" section.

I wonder if you would just have a "start discussions" option. So for a particular group only admins can start discussions. Members could still start discussions in subgroups if you wanted. That seems like a slightly simpler setting - would that be satisfactory? I like it because it sits along side a "members can start proposals" setting.

@richarddbartlett