| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

FrontPageDiscussion

Page history last edited by PBworks 17 years ago

FrontPageDiscussion

 


 

Introduction/Definition/etc

 

Email complaints about FrontPage#Committee prompted open discussion on the content of the FrontPage, both positive and negative, plus process issues which outside viewers may not care about.

 

The text under discussion is:

 

Wendy reported the website and pushed towards announcing this NoVAPeers.pbwiki.com to the RegionalSteeringCommittee, who were given web viewing access, but not yet editing capability (possibly later through emailing invites?). More to be discussed about this, as this action was not mentioned in advance to the Interactive Website team, nor the person who wrote 200+ of these pages, and payments have not yet been arranged per our last large RRWG meeting, among other Process and respect issues... The next meeting with CSBExecs (15 mins after the Steering Committee finished) Jerry mentioned this is Alpha (which tends to move towards Beta by a subset of 'bleeding edge' users providing feedback and debugging before public release), and pushed back with a CommitteeOfTheWhole approach, since most RRWG people have not been contributing directly on this Interactive Website subgroup which is proposed FOR ALL STAKEHOLDERS (including taxpayers who usually may carry the wooden stake ;-} ) Jerry

 

Jerry adds: The actual email complaints remain unsubstantiated, and unstated here...

 

Issues

 

Open discussion of the issues around the FrontPage content.

 

Emailed Complaint

 

Jerry got an email complaint from a RRWG officer alarmed about some of the negativity of the FrontPage#Committee paragraph. 

 

Doug moved that paragraph here.

 

 

Jerry repeats:

The actual email complaints remain unsubstantiated, and unstated here...

 

In what hat was the decision made to remove the FrontPage text? 

As secretary, I could see it, but if not communicated with the LeadContact, what kind of process is that?

As a website team member, not likely appropriate

As competing LeadContact, not helpful to all.

Who else was involved in the decsion?

What alternatives were offered?

As things cool off, maybe adding a issues and support concerns link would have helped, but in the heat of the moment, as a chair announces a project in that context it seems  framed to like intending to fail.  Maybe 6 months down the road with Assistive Tech and no funding to do what is being presented here, it will be clearer the implications.

 

Discussion

Jerry Opens Discussion 

Or similarly, how to resolve such issues...

 

Jerry asks: Perhaps the complaint(s) received by Jerry should be made public so they can be discussed openly?

 

Doug responds

Doug may have got the same email but wonders if "Perhaps..." is:

1) A veiled threat to post a private email, which would be a power play, or

2) A suggestion that that officer post the email complaint on this discussion page, or

3) Something else entirely.

 

Doug thinks we need a split or more than just two web sites: one that definitively carries the will of the group forward to stakeholders, and one for internal issues, and another for each of the 7 subcommittees or subgroups internal process, and one for the officers's interal process. We are the Regional RRWG, after all, and perhaps The Northern Virginia Regional Commision would host, advise, or moderate any or all of our websites-to-be.

 

Jerry replies

Jerry thinks there has been plenty of splitting going on with the projects, and now would be a better time to consolidate. 

 

For example, Doug's editing the SideBar instead of the FrontPage and removing a contribution of this LeadContact and main author by about 20-25 to 1 ratio, may give the impression, we are just a group with no output, or services, but likely a power play to have a separate EPAT website, which we talked about as a alpha development area and rolling back into the main production site, maybe needing something tailored for smaller device screens.  If it had been discussed with me, or checking the history of the Interactive Website project or other members, you might have learned that subdomains are a plan of the interactive Website.  The original whiteboard discussions with Phil included subdomains like pbwiki.novapeers.org, reston.novapeers.org, arlington.novapeers.org, consumer.novapeers.org, provider.novapeers.org, ooofc.novapeers.org, etc...  This pbwiki would be one (or more) subdomain(s), but requires additional pbwiki hosting fees and a traditional website hosting service to link to it, which isn't looking very hopeful to me at this point with all the splitting and contraversy instead of cooperation, collaboration, and coordination...

 

Option 2 was what was being discussed, and since the author of the email declines to make criticism public, it would seem like the criticism doesn't exist, as it hasn't been shared and can't be discussed openly for all to see and respond to directly.

 

Representation

 

Doug asks:

who is representing who on this site and who is representing what point of view to whom? We don't even know who our readers are....

 

Jerry adds:

Without more voices contributing and speaking for themselves, and money to upgrade to other components of the larger Interactive Website, it has remained

more like Jerry's Blog.

See Disclaimer limitations, Phil Discussions and many other pages on this site describing the issues, ad nausium...

 

Unlike the WikiPedia.org which is designed for a neutral point of view as an encyclopedia, more like PolitiCopia.com where discussion can take place on both sides of the issue.  Consumer's voices being heard, family members being heard, providers being heard, etc...

 

 

Style

 

Doug's sense

is that the use of fonts is jarring and does not provide the "Impact" the font of that name might provide.

 

Jerry adds:

 

that style over substance is a recurring theme...

A piccadillo about font choice ignores other serious issues...

 

Doug, you have written more pages than anyone else here on the pbwiki, besides myself.  As a sounding board on the project and one of the people who knew what a wiki was in the feedback of the original proposal, maybe you have more time for style, but I've been busy writing content, where most others have not directly.

 

Some information is from group emails, like Beth's group history, but other subgroups do not report out and as a large group we haven't told many people we even exist, which I repeatedly asked the large group to do...

 

What we exist as, has been evolving, now with the novapeers.pbwiki.com project, getting it to the point that a chair thinks it might be presentable, or possibly sacraficed, given the context and tone of the announcement, it was hard to tell...

 

Was the announcement using our consumer driven process?

 

Was the LeadContact or any other member of the team made aware of it ahead of time to properly prepare (like a space to write it on the board, some hands on time with a machine and projector, print up some business cards, collect email addys to send invites to edit, etc)?

 

Conclusion(s)

 

Jerry guesses:

 

Tabled until possibly too late like the Interactive Website funding, venue connectivity, and many other issues described elsewhere on the novapeers.pbwiki.com site?

Possibly scapegoating?

 

Addendum: 

Jerry viewing the page on a M$ Windows machine while out in Taj meetings recently found a different font interpretation was much more jarring than on his home machine and OS (Linux based) where it is interpreted as rather Courier MonoSpaced.

Just before the March face to face large group meeting, one to one communication with Wendy clarified the intent as more helpful than pushed out while kept uninformed, and unpaid...

 

 

Page History

 

20070316 Jerry

Adding status of the contraversy with Addendum

 

20070207 Jerry

 

Adding structure to allow following the thread with Format heading2, etc

 

2007020x Doug

replies

 

20070201 Jerry

 

Page Statistics

Page Views:  since last edit

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.