Aims & Domains Discussion

Hi frens!

I’m following up on our pod aims and domains discussion. I recorded 2 Loom videos walking through this Figjam (had to break it into 2 because there’s a 5 minute limit on Loom).

My goal is not to formalize pod aims and domains directly or push this structure. Instead, this is intended to be a jumping-off point that gives us something to agree or disagree with.

A few potential guiding questions:

  1. What feels right about this?

  2. What might need modification?

  3. Are we missing things?

  4. How does this feel generally?

Please aggregate feedback into the Discourse forum.
Feel free to add direct comments in the FigJam, but please add screenshots in the Discourse forum to ensure all feedback is aggregated in one space.

Aims & Domains ‒ Part 1

Aims & Domains ‒ Part 2


Hi Chase, thanks for putting this together and for the explainer videos to provide context. The functional approach to defining pods makes sense, as I agree with you that allowing us to mix membership from between different orgs and groups is valuable.

The actual scope of pods and responsibilities for each will need refinement based on our evolving understanding of the purpose of the Orcanauts and its role going forward. For instance, I don’t see any scenario where the gov-naut focus stays the same. That said, I don’t see a reasonable way to clarify these until we have worked through the concerns we are addressing as part of the X1 feedback / Tea Time activities.

I’m not sure how this impacts the timeline for doing this work, so we may need to make adjustments there as well. Hope this is helpful.

1 Like

This is super helpful! I definitely think the X1 feedback conversations are incredibly important in refining aims and domains.

I think aims and domains should be a reflection of what comes out of these conversations and don’t see a reason to finalize any of this before working through current tensions.

1 Like