User talk:RobLa-WMF/Transparency

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki

Hiya Robla! I love that you wrote this. I think it raises a critical point about (and common objection to) transparency, and I think you should absolutely find a way to either integrate it into Transparency/Practices or at least bring it into the main namespace.

I think one critical best practice in this regard is not to equate transparency with good communication. Just because you are transparent does not mean that you are communicating effectively. In fact, as you point out, you may be worsening communication simply by increasing information overload. I think there are important counter-practices:

  • Be conscious of rhythm and flow. Integrate notifications so that people don't have to go to multiple places to find information. (A Recent Changes gateway to IRC channel is an example of this.) At the same time, find ways to manage that rhythm so that it's not overwhelming. Here's a story of how my old consulting firm addressed this problem in 2012.
  • Find touchpoints where you specifically invite people in. Some people love the deluge of information and will willingly swim through it. Others do not. Find regular, appropriate times to invite the latter group into the conversation, so that they can get updated as needed. They always have the option of checking on their own if they want.

Okay, feeling tapped out! Would love to hear what you think! (And also nice to "see" you.)

--Eekim (talk) 02:47, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eekim, it's great hearing from you! I still remember your 2010 Xerox Parc talk (and our adventure getting y'all there) fondly. (/me waves at Priyanka, Trevor, and Tomasz). I've been thinking about replying, and then getting distracted before getting a reply composed. I'll look over the material you linked. I have a lot more to say on this topic, but I'll have to save it for another day. Please feel free to ping me in other channels if you want a higher bandwidth conversation; otherwise, we'll just keep going with our slow motion back-and-forth here.  ;-) -- RobLa-WMF (talk) 02:11, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]