Replies: 3 comments 2 replies
-
|
Regarding MVP of the network of shared purpose: Another way of putting it is that every project profile will have a /team page. That page will be much like any company’s standard team page. But it can scale from 3x3 roomy grid to compact 16x100+ Probably all personal profiles should have a /team page as well. All of my project collaborators are basically on 'Team Erlend', and I wanna list them as such. My team page would be made up of all of my public contacts, ordered roughly by the degree of entanglement (time spent working together) between me and each person listed. Team pages would have some small randomizations built in. It’s not supposed to be a page that encourages playing the comparison-game; if it devolves into a numbers game then it’s a boring/bad game. My personal team page would be made up of my connections on:
It’s like the opposite of this: https://indieweb.org/POSSE Any number of ‘activity logs’ (aka ‘recorded proofs of work’) can be plugged into the teams. A good start would be GitHub and Discord. What we are looking for is basic activity data that signifies project involvement. On GitHub that’s recent commits/comments. On Discord that’s recent posts. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Musing about teams/projects: I think every project has at least one team, I.e. the project-wide team of members with write-access to that project. I don’t think we should allow creating stand-alone teams, at least not until we have a very clear use case for them. So to start with, every team needs to exist within a project. A team without a project is just a group dm. We could probably make a v0.1 of Project(+Team) by duplicating our existing Links component* (*no standardized language here yet). It's just a Links page with a member-list attached. The start of Weird’s own project page would just be a series of links to essential resources, like this Discord (and hopefully soon a public-web archive of it), our github, blog posts… v0.1 of a Project is literally just a linkspage (which for starters can be single-user-owned, even though org-owned will be the default later) with a subpage that lists a subset of our network’s member list. That’s kind of our page-building philosophy: just start piling some stuff up. If enough people pile on (good-heartedly), it’ll take on a clearer shape. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Mockup - Project Nodes
Forgot to add a top-level link for Members edit: would call them nodes/extensions.. instead of spaces, which is an occupied term. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42757462
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
We’ve been increasingly referring to the common layer of Teams/Projects underpinning both Weird & Roomy as Spaces. We’ve talked before about how Roomy as a product would probably be an extension of the weird.one platform, which I think still holds. My current thinking: Roomy-as-a-Service will be sold as Weird Spaces. Weird Spaces = Chatty community gardens = Roomy spaces So, (Roomy) Spaces-as-a-Service, the 🆕 SaaS. It’d cost $10/month and upwards for a Space. However, we would also continue to build out our free-for-all (individuals, not corporations) p2p offering co-existing with (and adding robustness to) that service.
☝️ group-projects, as all the most ambitious projects are, aren’t coordinated primarily in the planning layer (Notion/Trello, GitHub Issues..). 90% of distributed project coordination happens in the group chat, at the very least in terms of ‘messages sent’. ..that holds true for all the projects I enjoy anyway 😄 I want as little uppercase Project Management to be going on as at all possible. That’s one of the reasons why Notion didn’t stick with me even though it was an excellent tool for Project-Drafting. It just wasn’t essential enough in the day-to-day of projects work. Weird (extended with Roomy to create Weird Spaces) is an all-in-one toolkit for public-first project spaces. Projects very much in plural, not existing as isolated islands. Weird is a public-first network of knowledge communities. As a private-first network of activist communities, Acter provide some excellent prior art to concretize what constitutes a Space.
The same way Discord is 90% of our projects space right now. 90% of our most collaborative “project-ing time” is spent communicating together in this shared comms space. The Roomy app experience is this: https://blog.muni.town/chatty-community-gardens/ Basically Discord meets Notion. As two different app-windows, Roomy is Discord-like first while Weird is Notion-like first, but they’re both views into the same underlying core for a ‘Digital Web Identity’ app (in-a-box). Similarly, they’re both facilitators of space-making. The notion-first side of the experience is demonstrated very effectively here: https://maggieappleton.com/nontechnical-gardening That’s essentially the Weird side of it, the personal/private-first way of gardening. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Weird and Commune/Roomy have at least two UX/spec fundamentals in common: Teams and Projects. These concepts work the same way in both apps. Whichever of the two apps a team/project (org) starts out with, they’ll want the other one as well in short succession.
To effectively build ambitious projects you need teams, and teams are formed around projects. They are two sides of the same coin.
One thing current collaboration apps (inspired by “agile” and other such rigid/busy practices) generally do poorly is to help people work on their projects in perpetuity. In mainstream productivity frameworks, leaving a task "hanging" is considered bad practice.
Depending on how you define a project I've been involved with 20-200 of them. The thing is, I’ve never fully given up on any of a single one. But I’m detached enough (because I had to narrow my focus to get anything of substance done) to happily play the support-role on most of them. I just wanna see all those project ideas be brought into being, whichever way possible.
Having spent some 20 years now doing projects (by building/joining/assisting teams), I see that ideas from decades ago aren’t standing still, even if they’ve just had a few days worth of active development time. And then there are global-scale dreams like “let’s make an open source game console & marketplace owned by the commons” which we are in fact becoming rapidly close to (as long as venture capital and AI don't enshittify it first).
Point being, there’s basically no downside and loads of upside to listing every single project-idea I’ve ever engaged with. Even though the chances are small, just having any chance of making contact with someone whose idea is closely aligned enough with mine that we can team up? Pure upside ✨
Weird (identity) concerns itself with the listing of projects & teams; directories for discovery.
Commune (bonfire) concerns itself with the communications of projects & teams; spaces for gathering.
I think the act of making the right OAuth scopes on either side will provide an interesting exercise that might point in the direction of additional spec work we might need to make up for our own ends. Where Commune and Weird meet, we are making a Protocol for Collaboration 🫂
Inspiration: https://portfolo.app/
Research projects
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions