Discord <--> Forum (Discourse) Tracking

Simple Discord Proposal
Since our forum is not being synced to Discord in anyway, I propose that we create a #governance-links channel in Discord where all Temp Checks and Proposals are explicitly shared so that there is higher visibility of the new posts in Discord.

Many find keeping up with the Discord alone challenging. I know I do now that I am actively working again. Since so little of the community action happens around the forum, precisely because it is lower bandwidth, I think it is even easier to lose track of.

Some communities automate notification between Discourse and Discord to make the task of following the two in relation to each other easier. Discord notification of new topics in certain forum categories, and their replies, is possible. However, @zkchun says that those plugins do not work for us, because we are using SAAS Discourse instead of the opensource version.

That being the case I entreat us to create the Discord channel above, or something similar, and to get in the habit of sharing the relevant links there to simplify all of our ability to track, read, and hopefully respond to time sensitive posts in this forum.

It is possible that this would be unnecessary if use of the #:up:-tldr channel became a habit amongst all Pods and SonarLabs, and all Temp Check Proposal links were posted were clearly made a part of all meeting posts to that channel.

I like the idea of not proliferating channels, at the same time a separate channel for this purpose explicitly serves as a kind of reminder to share appropriate posts there.

Opnions?

Two things around this:

1 Discourse <> Discord integration

We now have a working setup that sends a message to a Discord channel whenever a new forum topic is created: https://discord.com/channels/800379096555061260/905913017357705276/957616057697333328

So I was mistaken when I thought

that those plugins do not work for us, because we are using SAAS Discourse instead of the opensource version.

Was revisiting this Friday and realized I was incorrect. Thanks for bringing this up tho.

I do think having forum updates outside of #-tldr this is necessary because:

  1. Not all new topics are a result of meetings
  2. I think #-TLDR should be strictly for super quick catch ups; minimizing the amount the user has to scroll up is part of that imo and embedded messages (either from sharing links or from a bot) will mean more scrolling for the user

It is flexible where we decide to let the bot send a message for new topics. But, as you pointed out, not a fan of creating new channels if we don’t have to. So for now, I’m pointing to #ships-log where we are pointing Twitter updates with OrcaBot to as well.

2 About #-ships-log

In practice, #ships-log isn’t being used as it was originally intended from what I see; sharing finished written work like articles, Twitter threads, etc. Right now, it’s being used for sharing any links to articles or tools, some of which I think should belong in #watercooler or #workshop. So I’d like to reconsider how #ships-log is used.

What are your thoughts on something like this @aia @JonSimmons-dendrons:

  • Changing #shipslog to read-only
  • Moving #shipslog to the Stage category

People who want to share their work can just do so in #watercooler moving forward and this keeps ships log a lot cleaner.

I thought of #water-cooler as a nice way of sharing about completely off-topic things.

I think a read-only version of #ships-log in a completely open space used more as designed is great.

I also think we need a place to share on-topic links that people really should be reading. Whether we learn to use the forum more and do it here, or in Discord it should happen.

TBH, I am somewhat disappointed about how little general governance geek conversation happens in “public” in the community. I think that to live up to the reputation that has already been created that kind of conversation needs to be more public in the community. That is why I was very consciously supporting @wgow to join us. (Yes, I know there is some that happened in gov-naut as a part of research, but that is not the same thing, and I saw much less active participation there, than I really would have liked to.)

@julz has brought out how challenging what we are all trying to do is, and I don’t think as a community we have as conscientious a focus on the reality of that, and therefore a live enough community conversation around it. What happens on Twitter, is not enough, nor is it even remotely the ideal forum for it.

My biggest concern is that due to time constraints, even good contributors have a hard time taking in information, processing it, and participating around it meaningfully. We’re even seeing this around governance, and therefore witnessing in a small dOrg all the problems we know exist for DAOs.

With that I think the essential question asked by several people of what Sonar Labs really wants from this community in an explicit memorialized answer would be very helpful. (I know we’re slowly getting there with the governance process, I am just calling out the importance of it, as we also try and make progress in producing shareable value as a community.)

Although you have been forthcoming with your views, we need an official Sonar Labs response where you all have consensus on it.

People will give more real and focused time to the community, when they have a reasonable belief that their investment in time and energy will be rewarded in the ways that are valuable to them, whether that is a crypto-asset, or some other way.

With the ambiguity of what the community is about it is almost impossible for itself to choose to pull itself up by its own bootstraps because of the feeling that it won’t be “Ok.” And, if Sonar Labs is to be the primary grantor of funds, even for kickstarting something other than a Discord community, we need to know exactly what it is trying to create to make sure we are in alignment with that before we make significant investments of our time and energy believing we will eventually get our “reward” of whatever kind as desiered by the individual.

My biggest concern is that due to time constraints, even good contributors have a hard time taking in information, processing it, and participating around it meaningfully. We’re even seeing this around governance, and therefore witnessing in a small dOrg all the problems we know exist for DAOs.

This is part of the challenge we are trying to address as navnauts, so I agree we should keep trying things until something functional is achieved.

YES to ships log read only, public access
YES keep TLDR as a “stand up” summary

We might have to regularly remind users what to post where, and move posts to the correct spot.

1 Like