RE: @timcliff's Witness Hardfork Approval Standards v0.1
It seems to me that it will turn into whatever we turn it into.
It is not that easy, because of the "we" part. As a stakeholder such as yourself, you can make suggestions, but there is no way for you to get people to follow them. Even as a witness, I can do the same, and I can be a little bit more forceful with my suggestions by withholding my vote from a hardfork, but even that isn't necessarily going to be enough to force action. The dev team still may not do what I suggest, and the stakeholders may vote me out and replace me with a witness who has different standards.
do you have any suggestions for a person like me who has extensive agile project management and organizational skills as to how I can contribute to making it happen?
You can reach out to @andrarchy if you are interested in helping in an official capacity.
Thanks. Following your suggestion, I reached out to @andrarchy and he suggested that I make a full post with my proposal. So I did: https://steemit.com/steem/@borislavzlatanov/steem-s-governance-towards-a-continuous-improvement-system
I am interested to hear if this would make for a more stable governance process from a witness point of view, with clearly distributed roles.
It's well thought out. To a large extent, we already are doing something basically along those lines. IMO it is a little bit too formal though. Getting a lot of the parties mentioned in the post to do things a certain way is a little bit like herding cats.
Thank you for reading it. Is what you're already doing happening on Slack? Because what I see on Steemit is more so people pushing for their own point of view rather than looking at metrics and designing an experiment to determine how well their idea would work.
Yeah, it can be as formal as needed. Getting a lot of the parties to participate in a given process can happen if they see benefit from using the process. They have to have confidence that it's a process we're all agreeing to use, and we're all agreeing to adjust it to suit our collective needs, and we'll use data to determine what works how well, rather than the one with the most power/influence making the decision. If people have confidence that this is indeed the case, they will participate if they are asked to and it is shown to them very clearly how to participate.