Re: Social Web WG agenda for 11 August 2015

On 08/12/2015 07:37 AM, Melvin Carvalho wrote:
>
>
> On 12 August 2015 at 11:13, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com 
> <mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On 11 August 2015 at 09:58, Bassetti, Ann <ann.bassetti@boeing.com
>     <mailto:ann.bassetti@boeing.com>> wrote:
>
>         Hi Social Folks --
>
>         I just entered my regrets into the wiki, for tomorrow's WG
>         meeting.  I'm hoping this will be the last week I'm out. (Been
>         working really hard  on my 94-year-old Mom's house, and with
>         home health care providers, seeking as many assistive options
>         as we can think of, so she can continue to live independently.)
>
>         One idea we had in the Social IG meeting a couple weeks ago,
>         was to use the Social WG  'off' week meeting times, to meet
>         with WG folks (whoever we can get to show up) -- to try and
>         talk through the objections on various user stories. Many of
>         the ones with 'minor' objections seem based in nuance of
>         language, about how the story was written -- more than
>         objection to the fundamental concept of the story.
>
>         Although we've had some really interesting discussions within
>         the IG, and with a couple WG 'objectors' attending, it seems
>         clear we need more WG involvement in these discussions.
>
>         If the WG A) still thinks it would be useful to work through
>         the user story objections; and, B) thinks it would be OK to
>         use the alternating 'off' weeks for such discussion -- I will
>         set it up for next Tuesday.
>
>
>     Hi Ann
>
>     The question of approved user stories was raised in yesterday's
>     meeting.  Evan said that he seemed to recall that all the +1 user
>     stories and the +1/0 user stories might be considered approved. 
>     We weren't 100% sure on the call, I think a couple of people said
>     they would check back on this.  Seems a reasonable approach.  Also
>     note a few of the user stories now have existing implementations.
>
>
> I also think it may be a good opportunity to revisit the analysis of 
> voting.
>
> +1 was supposed to mean "will implement' .  But only 2 / 90 are marked 
> as implemented.  And only 1 so far using activity streams.  And none 
> have been implemented by all groups.
>

IMO "approved" presents a false dichotomy.    People should only look at 
individual votes...

        -- Sandro

>
>
>         I'm looking forward to getting back to this!
>
>          -- AnnB
>
>         Ann Bassetti
>         The Boeing Company
>
>         *From: *Arnaud Le Hors
>         *Sent: *Monday, August 10, 2015 11:58 AM
>         *To: *public-socialweb@w3.org <mailto:public-socialweb@w3.org>
>         *Subject: *Social Web WG agenda for 11 August 2015
>
>
>         Now available:
>         https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2015-08-11
>         --
>         Arnaud  Le Hors - Senior Technical Staff Member, Open Web
>         Technologies - IBM Software Group
>
>
>
>