Welcome to Codidact Meta!
Codidact Meta is the meta-discussion site for the Codidact community network and the Codidact software. Whether you have bug reports or feature requests, support questions or rule discussions that touch the whole network – this is the site for you.
Post History
My three cents the point is that if supporters "register" somehow, then we know whom to contact and could do it with automation rather than hand-written comment pings. This would essentially ...
Answer
#2: Post edited
by
Moshi
·
2020-12-17T20:03:42Z (over 3 years ago)
bolded the part I think is the most important, proposed solution
My 1 cent- > the point is that if supporters "register" somehow, then we know whom to contact and could do it with automation rather than hand-written comment pings.
- This would essentially be solved by [being able to subscribe to a specific post](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/75060).
- > I don't know if there is still a meaningful distinction between [idea] and [proposal].
- There probably isn't, to be honest. The only difference was that one was "You should have a community of some interested users helping to build the site", but since we do the interest check regardless, it doesn't really matter.
- > What else? What changes (in code or process) would help people proposing, supporting, and evaluating new communities on our network?
Honestly, the only thing that needs to change is activity - even though a proposal has 10 people saying they're interested, and maybe 3 experts, if none of them are actually working on the proposal itself (scope etc.) then it'll die.I think part of it is how clunky comments are - they don't show as activity on the front page, so all the *real* discussion goes unnoticed and unanswered since nobody is gonna check back on a proposal if there's no "activity", right?
- My three cents
- > the point is that if supporters "register" somehow, then we know whom to contact and could do it with automation rather than hand-written comment pings.
- This would essentially be solved by [being able to subscribe to a specific post](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/75060).
- > I don't know if there is still a meaningful distinction between [idea] and [proposal].
- There probably isn't, to be honest. The only difference was that one was "You should have a community of some interested users helping to build the site", but since we do the interest check regardless, it doesn't really matter.
- > What else? What changes (in code or process) would help people proposing, supporting, and evaluating new communities on our network?
- Honestly, **the only thing that needs to change is activity on the proposal** - even if a proposal has ten people saying they're interested, and maybe three experts, when none of them are actually working on the proposal itself (by discussing scope etc.) then it will die.
- I think part of it is because of how clunky comments are - they don't show as activity on the front page, so all the *real* discussion goes unnoticed and unanswered since nobody is going to check back on a proposal if there's no "activity", right?
- Perhaps we need to think about notifying users about comments - whether that be in general or just for subscribed users (when single-post subscriptions become a thing).
#1: Initial revision
by
Moshi
·
2020-12-17T05:46:07Z (over 3 years ago)
My 1 cent > the point is that if supporters "register" somehow, then we know whom to contact and could do it with automation rather than hand-written comment pings. This would essentially be solved by [being able to subscribe to a specific post](https://meta.codidact.com/posts/75060). > I don't know if there is still a meaningful distinction between [idea] and [proposal]. There probably isn't, to be honest. The only difference was that one was "You should have a community of some interested users helping to build the site", but since we do the interest check regardless, it doesn't really matter. > What else? What changes (in code or process) would help people proposing, supporting, and evaluating new communities on our network? Honestly, the only thing that needs to change is activity - even though a proposal has 10 people saying they're interested, and maybe 3 experts, if none of them are actually working on the proposal itself (scope etc.) then it'll die. I think part of it is how clunky comments are - they don't show as activity on the front page, so all the *real* discussion goes unnoticed and unanswered since nobody is gonna check back on a proposal if there's no "activity", right?