( Are some of these people Trusted seeds?
)
This could be great for continuity and to have a pool of more people as to not run into burnouts.
I overheard @Griff speak to there being an element of importance to the quantifiers being able to know who is doing what work as it supports continuity. I couldn’t agree more about the continuity part. The best database you have in a decentralized group is eachother. Teaching people to be aware of their surroundings is how information can be collected and shared. Common language is a piece too.
I appreciate the context I gain from reading Praise. I personally read every props and did-a-thing in my communities server. That’s where a majority of the deliverables go. I learn what’s happening and as time goes on I learn the people associated with the working groups too. After testing this process out in over a dozen servers I can say that It’s possible to read those without names/faces attached and eventually be able to know who is being spoken of. The dots will get connected on the video calls when people are giving updates (I don’t recognize faces much which is why I know this works i’m never tracking faces to contributions rather behavior.)
I’m appreciating the anonymous aliases. Anonymity has been brought up on a few occasions by many people over the span of sourcecred and even recently it’s resurfaced I like the idea because it sounds like it would make more people engage with it.
Quantification Parameters Appendix
GitHub
- Does anything happen for reviews?
- Does anything happen if someone links a fix / closes out an issue within their pull request?
From a developers point of view are these things part of a first buildout or do they come in later on down the road?
It’s so rad to be able to see an instance be built with more intention of the behavioral impacts.