I think we're hammering how to ease that communication flood.
If we have an open forum for ideas, an internal channel for technical discussions and a developer's tracking platform we should be able to more easily get people the information they need.
I think most of the participation on this list is geared towards the first two of the above, and we're starting to use Redmine to get the third rolling. If we can get that magical third piece in place, liasing between public ideas and developers, we'll be sound as a pound. Agile/OpenAtrium I think are the best tools to facilitate this, and Agile looks to be a really powerful tool.
Once we get the communications straightened out and running smoothly, I think you'll be much happier.
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Margarete Koenen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Personally, I simply don't have the time to wade through all the conversations going on in this group in order to find the few bits and pieces that might be directly relating to what I am working on. If I want to get something done I need to be able to find pertinent information easily. As far as organizing work-related information, it needs to be decided on by those that are actually doing the work.
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Charles Lenchner <email@example.com>
I vote for b - using the new website forum.
You might think in terms of 'conversation starters' over there, and then
tell the list what you've done with a link, so others can respond THERE and
[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of
Sent: Friday, October 21, 2011 9:29 AM
Subject: [NYCGA Internet] Process question
hi all -
It was great to meet the team who have been working so hard to make the new
website happen and also to chart the vision for future work by this group.
Thanks for all your efforts!
I have a process question:
I have IA recommendations for the new website.
Should this kind of input be posted to:
a. this google group list
b. the Internet working group forum on the new website
Can we clarify the intended use of these three channels, and also some roles
responsibilities for the people doing the real work of the group?
I am uncomfortable with the idea of independently creating tasks in redmine
with no sense of who will be prioritizing and assigning the tasks - without
that, my input can easily add to noise that will detract from other
potentially more critical work.
I have an observation about redmine that I will send out separately.