Task #130
Vocabulary generation for Groups
| Status: | New | Start date: | 01/02/2012 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | Normal | Due date: | ||
| Assignee: | - | % Done: | 0% |
|
| Category: | ideation | Spent time: | - | |
| Target version: | - |
Description
It would be helpful to have a list of terms/phrases connected to groups. Not necessarily jargony, but just a vocabulary that we can use in descriptions but also to inform the product.
This would be a great task for someone who has a flair for words but also can be something that everyone can sort of pick up and add to as it is up.
I'm also not sure the best way to keep the list would be a ticket, but I'm just getting it in here.
History
Updated by Lippe Lippe over 1 year ago
- Participant
- Owner
- Administrator
- Participation Coach
- Online Groups Consultant
- Moderator
- Subject Matter Expert
There are some descriptions of how these roles are intended to function on the linked page.
Updated by molly b over 1 year ago
Another thing would be to get ideas for group vocabulary in different languages and from different cultures.
This could inform both how we are thinking about groups and how they work and maybe trickle into the name space.
Updated by Sam Boyer over 1 year ago
i know Lippe wasn't advocating for them necessarily, but i actually dislike, oh, at least half of the roles in that list for the types of groups we're talking about :)
in addition to roles, i think there are a few other families of terms to be included here: process (and consensus), trust, wording related to "internal" and "external" spaces (which encompasses "broadcasting")...and that's what i can think of right now.
Updated by Lippe Lippe over 1 year ago
Yeah, I guess I was referring to it because it's one of the few places I've seen where roles are discussed beyond the scope of access/perms, I didn't really dig in.
Participant is always decent. Owner is destined to be misconstrued, we share feelings on Administrator and Moderator. Participation Coach & Online Groups Consultant are bizarre and totally obtuse. I'd prefer support/helper/lifeguard/guide/usher, just about anything else.
I've experienced nothing but frustration when trying to codify levels of experience or expertise in participant roles or lists. The closest I've come to making it work is offering skill levels along the lines of "familiar / confident / can do it in my sleep"