There should be another button ‘Join us’ on the right of ‘Be a builder’ (maybe switched, join us on the left and be a builder on the right), so that we have to types of participation invites:
a soft one: join our community (pointing to the home forum page, or to the end of the introductions topic). Some people want to go directly to know members and topics of the community without reading further.
a strong one: help actively, building projects (pointing to https://humanetech.community/join/, as it is now). In this case, the title of the pointed page should be ‘Be a builder’ and not ‘Join our community’.
Remove the ‘Help reinforce…’ one. Also, remove the Join us here, because it would be in the button above (see first feedback).
Third feedback
From github to Documentation in the website:
now there’s a lot of documentation in the github repositories of HTC. We need to pour it to the Documentation section of the website. Noone that is not technical would go on github to search things, only to go to a particular resource that is already pointed by a link in the website (or in the forum).
Fourth feedback
Website icon in the forum header:
replace the left logo on the forum with something like [ Forum ]
replace the globe with a new icon representing the website, like [ HTC ]
remove all other icons (twitter - it’s now part of the social media channels in the website and github - too technical for most of the users, it would be linked from the be a builder page for active participation).
Fifth feedback
COC contact group (CG):
There must be a group of people responsible for addressing the issues raised by members about other members violating the CoC. This group (CG) has to be heterogeneous and diverse enough not to have the possibility that CG goes against the member raising the issue. A member can send complain to one of the CG, not to the whole CG, so that if the issue is about one of the CG him/herself violating the CoC, the other people in the CG team can fix the issue.
Sixth feedback
New short public introductions thread to replicate (maybe automatically - via widget) on the page ‘Our stories’ on the website.
Our stories aim: having a place where new members can feel themselves more in connection to the existing members of the community, in a way that they can find even naive similarities with some of them and experience some sort of shared feeling.
There should be a new topic, where we expressly say that any introduction made there will go to the website. So we can suggest to make them short and not to reply to any of them in that same topic. Then an automatic updater can be designed in the shape of a widget for the website page, where anyone can see the last members that have joined and decided to tell others their stories.
Regarding 6th feedback: I suggested closing the Our stories idea on the 2 issues about it (see here and here) and instead go for a People Directory, where people can present themselves in more professional way and create a Who’s Who to find helpers in the Humane Tech space.
I find this feedback less relevant. The under construction is temporary and looks better visually with the link. The ‘help reinforce our message’ is a repetition of the social channels at the bottom, true, but it is a call-to-action as well. It could be shifted higher up on the page. But I wouldn’t mind to remove it. Right now it serves its purpos to provide more filler text on the landing page. Note that the social media channels on the Community Team site author are also repetitions.
Re: third feedback - too much documentation in Awareness Program repo. I agree on that and intend to move the documentation to the Community Hub ‘Activities’ section. This will be part of the same-named project I created there.
Re: fifth feedback: Agree but this should be the Community Team. It is overkill to organize yet another group for that. Note that we should highlight that any member should Flag content that offensive, and then we have the Moderators to take a look at that.
I think we need a dedicated group of people (3-4) inside the @CommunityTeam to address this. So that if I have a problem with a person that is actually even inside this group, I can send my complain to someone else belonging to the same group. Right now there’s no contact in our CoC, so people don’t know who will take in charge their complain.
A member who wants to complain about someone has to know the recipient of his/her msg, otherwise if the msg contains complains against one of the moderators or admins he/she will be intimidated and will not send the msg.
I think this is an overly complex setup. We have multiple moderators. If some message is flagged there is already voting ‘Agree/Disagree’ among them. The ‘About’ page of the forum contains a contact point at the CHT. If we are a very large, active community we could have such a group, but right now this seems a bit like overkill to me. Imho this CG == Forum staff.
For me, this strips FB et al. of some of their power and transfers it to Brown. The personalization also allows us to better distinguish among these channels and provides us with a visual treat.
I find them a bit too big and distracting. The icons look very cluttered to me. Also when you have photo material on the site you immediately get trouble with color schemes and such. Then we’d need a skilled UX designer to get it right. I like the current flat-pixel design, as it is easy on the eyes, and straightforward to work with.
All the small things like this take up a lot of time to implement. I’d rather focus on having good content first.
BTW I am in the process of migrating the docs from Awareness Program repo to the website. That repo will be just for working on deliverables and as file archive.
OK, those are valid points. But suppose we introduced the Amazon or Google icon. I’m sure you would see the ethical problem immediately: we reinforce the power of FAGA when we use their icons.
We can resolve this later. You’re right that content matters are of utmost importance.
Tell us more about this Michele- I think what you are saying is important and may deserve a separate thread to be sure your thought is considered in a deeper way.
It could be there are deeper issues to manage. I’ve encountered a situation where I wanted to flag something but it was leadership who posted so I let go…
