• bcnet19 comisiones input14

last modified January 29 by facilitfsm


  • Directories @1
  • Navigation towards decidim @2  @4 @15
  • Representation who can edit organizations? Who can announce activities and iniatives  @3  @9
  • self tagging of activities @5
  • online participatin in activities - inclusiveness from below @6
  • autodocumentation of activities @7
  • co promoters entities of an initiative @8  
  • existing and new initiatives @10    geographical area for initiative @11
  • description of action dates in initiative form @12 
  • expectation from the group promoting an iniative - @13    info on how to join @14
  • ways of promoting initiatives @16 

 

Dear Jason and all  -

thanks  Jason  for this long awaited  message 

 

globe-logo.png1

We need to strike a balance between a whole lot of information that we would like to collect from people and what we can actually expect to get - with the shorter and simpler form possible

DIRECTORIES   BASIC SOCIAL FORUM USER FRIENDLINESS

  • Here i would like to make a strong point-  the concern is not to "extract data from people  with no return ",  the  concern is to give useful information to  wsfte participants  in the context of a process which is going at least a few months beyond the event - and where  participants  have possibility
    • 1/ to access certain data from others under the form of DIRECTORIES   
    • 2/ to UPDATE the forms they have created   
  • am struck by the fact that there is no description of those civicrm directories  sketching how they will appear to wsfte participants  . it is  as if they are not existing  see  D10 directorios
  • A very important technical issue is the display of links in the directory   i-e if  i describe  an activity i propose, and in this description i insert a  http://xxxxxxxxxxx   text , then in the  ctivicrm  directory  display, this should be recognized as a link and become a clickable link in the display  by other wsfte particpants

Therefore, thanks for this last message, which makes it much easier to answer and deal with the issues you raise.
Jason  comment  in blue:  Pierre commenting in brown  

 

globe-logo.png2

A16- D16 for individual form  tab

A16 D16  your Account username in decidim)   BASIC WSFTE USER FRIENDLINESS CIVICRM<>DECIDIM 

 We cannot add an account name for decidim, though I understand your concern. 

  •  It is not "us" who are adding this account name ( it would be done when updating  the personal form  and certainly not on the first time he would register , it would be the participant  themselves  later as they understand that  this is  probably  the only way  a connection can be made  visible to other wsfte participants between   their civicrm and decicim user names -  
   Fact is that the data in the individual registration is not public for the most part (except, if accepted in the authorization part: name, country, organization).  
  •   I have mentionned repeatedly  the issue of what will the various civicrm public DIRECTORIES  look like  and which information they will provide
  • it is high time there is an explicit description of what is expected from the civicrm team in this regard  although it seems  nearly  nothing has been described  so far  -  public directories with relevant info  is a fundamental feature of social forum 
  • You can see the montreal participant directory here   with your public profile :-) : https://fsm2016.org/es/participants/jnardi/profile/  NOW IMAGINE there is  in this display  a field with a LINK that allows others to navigate  in one click  to your  decidim profile - 
We will try to work on a SSO (single sign on) - but not sure it will be possible.  i in the current context there  seem to  be  little probabilty that this will happen, hence this simple proposal of adding a user edtitable field

globe-logo.png3

Clarification for  D33 fields in organization form tab  

WHO CAN EDIT ORGANIZATIONS? 

WHO CAN ANNOUNCE ACTIVITIES AND  INITIATIVES?

iIT IS NOT CLEAR whether the two names indicated in F45 and F46  in the  tab organization   
1/ are able, according to civicrm,  to edit the organization description 
 2/ are able,  according to civicrm registration,  to declare an activity or initiative in the name of this organization -
Field A33-D33 " 
Who are  the users authorized to coedit this organization " is proposing to list "declared representatives" of the organization adding to the implicit "tecnical representative which is the person creating the organization description - THIS ISSUE OF WHO IS CONSIDERED REPRESENTATIVE OF AN ORGANIZATION BY CIVICRM NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED   These notions  or organization representatives  and activty and initaitive responsible are explicited   in the  D11 lexico )-

NOTE field " other organizations you work with has been cancelled - if we put a limit  up to three other organizations you work with  that creates a mesh of links allowing to navigate in the Organization directory and in the organisations map 

 

globe-logo.png4

D13 D17 D19 D20 for activity from tab

A13 - D13 -Uso foro Online  en relación con esta actividad( max 400 signas 5 líneas)  : "Explicar si y como piensan utilizar el foro online para entrar en contacto con participantes FSMET en relacion a ella INDICATE THE LINK TO THE ONLINE SPACE IF YOU HAVE STARTED IT  

BASIC WSFTE USER FRIENDLINESS CIVICRM<>DECIDIM ONLINE FORUM 

 We are going to invite people to open processes in the virtual forum on the activity - but don't need them to explain why they would do it

  • Again here the main info is not expressing an intention i agree this is not  very useful ( although it is a relevant info for the virtual forum commisison to know who is interested) THE MAIN USAGE FOR THIS FIELD is the activity representatives coming later to  update this field and INSERT A DECIDIM LINK  to the  online/virtual forum space associated to this activity   once they have created it with help of the online forum commisison - 
  • THE RESULT  FROM THIS FIELD IS THAT THE ACTIVITY DIRECTORY IS INCLUDING A LIST OF ASSOCIATED ONLINE FORUM SPACES IF ANY and it is a reference for navigation 

 

globe-logo.png5

A17 - D17 -Categorizar la actividad  según las 3 dimensiones temática - retos - necesidades- momentos en el evento

NICE TO HAVE SELF TAGGING STANDARD SOCIAL FORUM FEATURE

Tthe program structure is still not defined and those perspectives could be organised differently or changed. It's up to the content commission, once the program is better defined, to categorize better when / where to put the activity

  • Self location in tags list is usually proposed in social forum - the task of  the content commisison is more to establish a relevant list of tags then decide the categorization of the activity - there are several type of categorizations  that have been mentionned   -    the moment -  the thematic  - the challenges ( remember barcelona april )   the population necessities  (advocated by some in april -is there any list ?)    and i would add  - the fact that the activity is focusing on certain initaitives or not   ( which can be deducted from the field  E12)
  • i understand discusion is open and not finalized - but  i think the issue of SELF LOCALIZATION in several content DIMENSIONS is a relevant one

 

globe-logo.png6

A19- D19 -Apertura de la actividad a participación en línea (max 400 signas= 5 líneas ) : favor explicar si y cómo ustedes se organizaran sin apoyo del comité organizador  para acoger la participación en línea de personas que no se encuentren físicamente en la sala) (esto  

NICE TO HAVE SHOWING WSFTE EVENT IS INCLUSIVE FROM BELOW TO THOSE NOT TRAVELING  
You are right, a reference to online interaction is missing.  But I would word it differently: "Blended activity: are you planning online interaction during the activity (streaming, video/audio meeting, use of social media, etc.)?"

  •   if we agree on the relevance of this field that a good step  - the wording can be found /  again here   inserting links to  jitsi meeting  to  facebook video  etc  should be possible  

     globe-logo.png7

    A20 - D20 Documentación  de la actividad donde y como a (max 400 signas= 5 líneas ) -

    NICE TO HAVE SHOWING THERE IS A POST EVENT  PERIOD THAT IS PLANNED AS OF NOW( OPTIONAL FIELD)  

    this is still to be discussed, but I think the Forum should propose / offer a common way to document and report the results of the activity.  In any case, during the registration I do not think it is relevant.

    • Two argument explaining why i disagree 
    •  1/  these are self organized activities and the  WSFTE facilitation team  ( see the  meaning of this word i wsfte lexicon here :-)  D11 lexico )  is stimulating  self documentation but is NOT substituting the  actors politically responsible   for documentation  who are the activity organizers  -
    • 2/ kindly consider that these activity description form is  not  a  ONE SHOT creation   " register and forget"   -  These form  reflect the dynamics of the process  and  can be edited by the people responsible for the activity  (and who are considered by civicrm as entitled to edit the form after creation ( open issue here) 
    • These updates are for instance for reflecting the effect of wsfte process on the activity   -including new organization involved -  new contact people  -, new elements of description, -  new initaiives to be discussed   and after the event the field  docmentation will be particularly used  - 
    • Some fields of the form  could be frozen at a certain moment  (- or  a copy made by the facilitation team to craft the program   but  the ACTIVITY DIRECTORY  is basically a living  agregate of living  documents 

    NOTE   there is mention of a distinction which IS NOT CLARIFIED SO FAR IN ANY FIELD  between "concrete actvitities  and open space activities"-  I would word it   

    • activities with a clear  group of  logistically and poltically responsible entities  and
    • activities  with a group of logistically responsaible entities that is meant as an open space -  or a session of a convergence space already existing 
     

    D12 D13 D14 D20 D21 D22 D29 D31 for initiatives from tab

     

     globe-logo.png8

    A12- D12 Entidades CO promotoras  :(máx. 400 signas= 5 líneas) Cuáles  organizaciones grupos inscritos co-promueven esta iniciativa? (hay una de las organizaciones de la persona que describe la iniciativa, más el seleccionar organizaciones en la lista,  o mencionarla por texto si no la encuentran-

    FUNDAMENTAL   

    ok, this was mistakenly taken out ("Organisation(s) promoting the initiative")

    •  OK  AND THAT IS  A FUNDAMENTAL POINT   initiatives are not organizations they are presented in the name of a group of organizations- it is important to understand the reason for this "mistake"  - 

     

    globe-logo.png9

    D13 Personas responsables de la iniciativa en fsmet ( max 200 signas 2 lineas)  a escoger entre participantes-

    PRAGMATIC  SAME TREATMENT  OF CONTACT PERSONS  FOR ACTIVITIES AND FOR INITIATIVES  

    there is already a "public contact" for the initiative (plus the user who created it)

    • There is a "public contact  person " field in the activity form  ( which requires clarification   about how this "public contact" is considered by civicrm see the civicrm representativenes  question raised in several part of that message) 
    • There should be a similar field in the initiative form,  while so far THERE IS NOT UNLESS I AM MISTAKEN
    • see the notion of  "tecnical representative"   and "declared representative"  for organization  through A32-D32 activity  and  the notion  of "tecnical responsible" and "declared responsible" ( through A13-D13 initiative)  These notions are explicited   in the  D11 lexico )-
    • My pessimistic assumption is that for the time being we have a very  technically  centralized   scheme in civicrm
    • Only those having created an organizatin are considered representative  and consequently  only those having declared an organization are entitled to propose activity and initiative  - 
    • The only reasonnable way to broaden this population would be to have fields in the organization , activity and initiative form where   to declare  other  represenative in the organition  form  and declare other responsible in the actifvity and initiative form
    • There could be, as for activities, a civicrm  "built in" limit that  an organization cannot be "tecnical responsible" for more then  2 or 3 activities or initiatives 

     

    globe-logo.png10

    D14 Progreso actual de la iniciativa (existente o proyectada),-

    BASIC DISTINCTION BETWEEN EXISTING INITIATIVES AND THOSE STARTED IN THE EVENT   

    this can be part of the description, we are not collecting analytic information on each initiative (can be done by other mappings)

    • well this is a significant  pragmatic  concrete field   very simple radio button    existing  /  projected 
    • if the initiative is "existing" there is a past and present and future
    • if the initiative is "projected on occasion of wsfte"  there is no past and it is all expectation For instance : there is a strategic agenda initiative  which is projected and will hopefully take concrete shape on occasion of the event in barcelona 

      globe-logo.png11

      D20 -Área(s) geográfica(s) de desarrollo de la iniciativa,  (máx. 200 signas= 2 líneas) RELEVANT: NOTION OF GEOGRAPHICAL AREA FOR AN INITIATIVE    

       "scale" corresponds to "scope"

      •  yes  this notion of scale of initiative is the only  inclusion from the suggestion so far  but in the  initiative  mapping fields  there is NOT  the notion of area   - 
      •  as an example   the mapping  can  present an "international scale" initiative   located somewhere in Florence  with longitude latitude,  but there is no field to dscribe the geographical area   where it is active  eg "  so far italy and spain  developing in senegal "  or something like this 
       
      globe-logo.png12 

      D21 -Resumen fechas acciones  de la iniciativa para el calendario FSMET - Por lo menos  1 fecha de acción pública durante o posterior al evento FSMET y  3 fechas acciones max) más tarde se llenara el DETALLE DE LA FECHA ACCIÓN 

       FUNDAMENTAL : LINK BETWEEN INITIATIVES AND ACTION DATES > WSFTE INITIATIVES CALENDAR as a distinguishable part of WSFTE self managed calendar - linking BOTH WAYS  "civicrm initiative directory" and  "wsfte calendar"  

      confusion between "initiative" and "event".  The calendar is a separate thing (that can have a link to an existing initiative - but the opposite is not automatic - i.e. it will not automatically create an event)

      • THIS NOT A CONFUSION :-)   THIS THE A KEY POINT  the underlying vision is that  1/  an initiative without public action date is unaccountable   2/ simple declarations  on occasion of wsfte can be considered very simple initiatives  with one action date  "public declaration" on wsfte barcelona dates -  
      • So  the practical consequence is that  all public results in wsfte can take the form of an initiative and be colected in the WSFTE INITIATIVE CALENDAR,  which  CAN BE A DISTINCT PART OF the WSFTE SELF MANAGED CALENDAR jason and david are referring to 
        • And it is FUNDAMENTAL to ask  the initiative promoters to give  1 to 3  public action dates, in field D21 
        • ( with the clear communication  from WSFTE faciltating group /understanding by  wsfte participants  that these action dates will be  reflected  in a specific content of the  wsfte calendar   " initiative calendar"),  
        • This initiative calendar can be filtered /presented as such, INSIDE THE GENERAL SELF MANAGED WSFTE CALENDAR  and edited by the initiative promoters themselves with accompaniment from content commission, based on the updated collection of D21 field  for each initiative - see the text here 
        • it would look like this  more or less  which has been implemented in Montreal WSF  https://fsm2016.org/es/actions/  -   
      • SO BEHIND THIS D21  FIELD  is  a  manual  interactive protocol from content commission  in inter-initiative space in contact with initiative promotros  to care about initiatives ( which will be discussed on january 23rd in content commission)  -
        • The result of this protocol  in the end is   generate  an updated  description  of the initiative  - with extra fields of  description of  action date  ( see the fields A24 to A28  in initiative tab)  that will be made visible  under  the form of a calendar as has been done in montreal https://fsm2016.org/es/actions/  -
        • This  wsfte iniative calendar  is a document with  a  high enough level of quality  - and based  on the D21 field 
        • It is the result of an interactive relation between content commision and initiative promoters which is structured around  - getting  update of this D21  field    -  clarifying   action related information that will  appear  in wsfte initiative calendar  
        • It is generated and updated for some months after the wsfte event ( which raises the issue of continuity of a minimal Technical team after the event, or a volunteering grou) 
        • NOTE  with a little bit of training  and info of the initiative promoters by the  content  commission, the   D21 field as a free text field can contain  in  free text format  all the elements of A24 to A28  and  be a clear unambiguous  basis for generating the  wsfte initiative calendar
        • in the end it can receive a link to the actiondates generated by the iniciative promotion group  in the calendar website    SO THERE IS A LINKAGE BOTH SIDES  BETWEEN  INITIATIVE FORM IN  CIVICRM AND THE CALENDAR TOOL
        •  

          Se entiende mejor la relevancia de este punto 12  leyendo este texto " como acompanamos a los grupos promotores de iniciativas"

         

               D21 field  in civicrm form can receive links to  dates of  self managed calendar   and   self managed calendar action dates description  can receive link to  the corresponding  initiative  visible in  initiative directory of wsfte : linking both ways

       

      globe-logo.png13

      D22 -Como grupo promotor, en torno a esta iniciativa: qué quieren lograr en FSMET (máx. 800 signas= 10 líneas) //Qué tipo de fortalecimiento apoyo PARA / DESDE su iniciativa espera obtener de/ aportar a  otros participantes / iniciativas // // Cómo podría articularse esta iniciativa con otras iniciativas y cuáles?

       RELEVANT   EXPRESSION OF EXPECTATIONS ABOUT WSFTE EVENT BY INITIATIVE PROMOTERS 

       As you've pointed out, the initiative is an action, not an actor nor an activity in the forum (though it can be presented through an activity). So why ask what they want to obtain?  This is more relevant for an activity.

      •  let me qualify :  this is about WHAT the promoters of an initiatve expect to get from their participation  in wsfte for the strenghthening and articulation of their initiative   ( for this they have several means :  the virtual online forum   - the inter initiative space  - and specific activities designed to focus at least partially on specific iniativies   (activity is one mean among other possible)  Como grupo promotor, en torno a esta iniciativa: qué quieren lograr en FSMET (máx. 800 signas= 10 líneas) //Qué tipo de fortalecimiento apoyo PARA / DESDE su iniciativa espera obtener de/ aportar a  otros participantes / iniciativas // // Cómo podría articularse esta iniciativa con otras iniciativas y cuáles?  

       

      globe-logo.png14

      D29 - Sumarse a la iniciativa ? : cómo está organizado su grupo promotor de la  iniciativa y cómo podría incluir a otras organizaciones en él  :(max 400 signas= 5 líneas) 

       RELEVANT  INFO FOR WSFTE PARTICIPANTS INTERESTED IN AN INITIATIVE

      Do you really want to ask if the initiative is self-referential or closed ?

      •  well it is not a YES NO  question  it is a HOW question  for other participants  browsing the initIative directory?  it is probably  useful to have info about "what are the criteria and protocols" for getting  included in the promoting group of a particular initiative  

       

      globe-logo.png15 

      D31 Uso del Espacio foro en línea hasta el evento FSMET y después (máx. 400 signas= 5 líneas):   usar el foro on line  para promover esta iniciativa  creación de espacio o yendo a interactuar en espacios existentes, las dos cosas , INSERIR EL LINK HASTA EL ESPACIO ONLINE SI EXISTE  etc..  -

       BASIC WSFTE USER FRIENDLINESS CIVICRM<>DECIDIM ONLINE FORUM

      not necessary.  At the end of the activity and initiatives form (or in the registration email they will receive) there will be an invitation and instructions on the virtual/online forum to promote and discuss.

      •  Again here the main info is not expressing an intention i agree this is not  very useful ( although it is a relevant info for the virtual forum commisison to know who is interested) THE MAIN USAGE FOR THIS FIELD is the  initaitive  representatives coming later to  update this field and INSERT A DECIDIM LINK  to the  online/virtual forum space associated to this initiative    once they have created it with help of the onlin forum commisison -
      • THE RESULT  FROM THIS FIELD IS THAT THE INITIATIVE  DIRECTORY IS INCLUDING A LIST OF ASSOCIATED ONLINE FORUM SPACES IF ANY and it is a reference for navigation   THIS IS  VERY USEFUL  INFO TO PARTICIPANTS  

      This is from my point of view, of course.
      • I have tried to give arguments on mine
       
      globe-logo.png16
      Just one last comment:

      You say: " initiatives linked to the forum"  (and on those that are not ) -    the initiatives that would be registered in answer to the "general invitation  to participate  in wsfte"  are  essentially linked to the forum  :  their promoters  want to use the wsfte process to make those initiatives visible and strengthen and articulate them, -  if someone wants to register an initiative  just for making it visible in the mapping  and do nothing about it in wsfte  it is possible, althought not very sensible 

      IMPORTANCE OF INTER INITIATIVE SPACE AND UPDATE OF INITIATIVE FORM 

      I say: if the promoter(s) of an initiative want to make it visible and articulate with others... they propose an activity or go in a convergence space and present it (online or at the event). 
      • Well this notion of "inItiaitive linked to the forum" is a Kevin formulation  - it is not mine 
      • i am just considering in priority  initiative promoting group that come to wsfte with expectation  that  they express in D22  They have several  means at their disposal for promoting their initiative,   which  are
        •  the inter -initiative space   online ( which can be on line  based on the initiative directory in civicrm) 
        •  the inter -initiative physical open space in barcelona  ( cared about by content commisison)
        • the  online forum spaces  ( 
        • and the activities  during the event in barcelona   (activities that the  initaitive promoter organize or activities oganized by others  where it is indcated that the iniative will be discussed ( see field in the activity form)    with this distinction which IS NOT CLARIFIED SO FAR  between "concreteactvitities  and open space activities"- 
        • AND OF COURSE UPDATING THEIR INITIATIVE DESCRIPTION  including the  D13  D21    fields  for reflecting  the evolutions of their initiative throughout the dialogues and interactions in wsfte along those three channels means

      Finally, we should be testing starting from next week -- so all of us are invited to do so and give feedback.
      • Also the  directory format of  individuals   organizations  activities y and initiatives directory  should be part of the testing  !!  

       

      ciao,  Jason