@Kernel-Stewards onto Phase 2!
By now, we should have had our hard conversations and have the dependency graph locked in.
So, we can start assembling our various Options into potential Shapes of programs.
That said, as we continue to explore Options, I encourage you to ground them to reality by making prototypes with actual content, and ideally based on personas with specific learning goals.
I changed the categories in the forum to a new structure and moved some posts around.
I’d like to lean on something I picked up from indigenous knowledge in KB5 - that sufficient dialog of a certain character better serves the same goal that voting does – especially in small groups. Put another way, the chiefs know that with enough conversation around the fire, empathy and understanding is given space to emerge, and there’s no need for voting or adjudicating. Everyone already knows what to do. It’s evident.
So with the Shapes category, l’ll take the lead with one thread per Shape being explored, in the same style as “updates from the kitchen.”. Under each thread, can I ask that you follow and engage in the same type of dialog with each other as before? These expose needs in actionable ways – inputs and constraints to design for.
You’re welcome to follow my lead and suggest shapes of your own too, but I still need your feedback in the form of this kind of dialog.
We’ll modify the concepts from the design feedback that emerges from our discussions.