Hello @Narrative Network Team

A Telegram member (Rose Lavender) posted today with concern about the LBGTQ niche that has been rejected, and gone to appeal.

The appeal cites concerns that the niche has been rejected because of discrimination, so naturally, Rose had concerns about this.

I cannot know what is in the heart of every voter, but I do know that I, and several others, took the time to leave comments on the ballot that explained that the niche name was misspelled.  The correct acronym is LGBTQ, not LBGTQ.  This matters because niches are a big part of how people will find content on narrative.  All the content of the LBGTQ niche would be much harder to find because the people searching will mostly be using the correct acronym.

This raises two problems: one old, and one new:

1) The new problem

It looks like once a niche is rejected and goes to the appeals process, the comments that were left on the ballot disappear and are no longer accessible anywhere.  Or at least not anywhere intuitive.  I did look.

This obscures the reason for the voting, which is highly relevant to the appeals process, not to mention important in case public analysis is required (like now).  Rose should have been able to see those comments, right by the appeal reason, so she could form her own sense of whether the appeal was justified or not.  

2) The old problem

Comments, even when they are still visible on the platform, are almost hidden away, instead of displayed prominently.  I know, I've posted about this at least twice before but it keeps rearing its head as a problem.  It is relevant now because, along with the comments becoming completely inaccessible once a niche goes to the appeals process, there is a growing sense that the Team isn't respecting the time and thought that goes into making the comments, and is squandering the value that they represent for the process of niche creation.

And now it is starting to hurt us: one person, and potentially some others who read her, might have left Telegram feeling there are problems of discrimination on Narrative, before it even launches.  That's the worst kind of rumour to have start.  I did my best to explain the situation to Rose Lavender, both in the Telegram thread, and in a private chat, and she understood.  But what if I hadn't been there AND it had been night time in the USA with David and MB asleep - and Rose had started posting about this elsewhere online?

Please, lets fix the comments workflow in the Alpha.

 

 

Original Post

Hi @Malkazoid - all of the comments are still there.  Here are the comments from the original (and second) ballot box votes:

https://alpha.narrative.org/ba...nts/8774792908961509

https://alpha.narrative.org/ba...nts/8352348105644862

And here is the previous tribunal comment thread:

https://alpha.narrative.org/is...nts/8493210281025056

As you can see from all of the comments, the reason it has been rejected by the community is because the term is misspelled. It has nothing to do with the subject matter, from what I can see. 

Per the rules, any niche that has a misspelling should be rejected.

You can peruse the entire history of the niche here:

https://alpha.narrative.org/niche/lbgtq-media

If you click on any one of the votes, you'll find the particular comments for each.

It's not likely that we will be making any structural changes to Chaucer at this point.  All of our efforts now are on the next version.  

This niche is back up for a Tribunal vote again and I'm pretty sure it will be rejected because of the misspelling (at least it should be).  It would be great if the niche owner actually fixed the spelling first.

Ted posted:

Hi @Malkazoid - all of the comments are still there.  Here are the comments from the original (and second) ballot box votes:

https://alpha.narrative.org/ba...nts/8774792908961509

https://alpha.narrative.org/ba...nts/8352348105644862

And here is the previous tribunal comment thread:

https://alpha.narrative.org/is...nts/8493210281025056

As you can see from all of the comments, the reason it has been rejected by the community is because the term is misspelled. It has nothing to do with the subject matter, from what I can see. 

Per the rules, any niche that has a misspelling should be rejected.

You can peruse the entire history of the niche here:

https://alpha.narrative.org/niche/lbgtq-media

If you click on any one of the votes, you'll find the particular comments for each.

It's not likely that we will be making any structural changes to Chaucer at this point.  All of our efforts now are on the next version.  

This niche is back up for a Tribunal vote again and I'm pretty sure it will be rejected because of the misspelling (at least it should be).  It would be great if the niche owner actually fixed the spelling first.

Hi @Ted

Thanks - then it seems that the 'new problem' is in fact the old problem.

I couldn't find the comments!  Neither could Rose.  And I've been using the Alpha for months...

The comments should be visible in some form, on the Appeals page, and on this page:

https://alpha.narrative.org/niche/lbgtq-media

Instead, one has to drill down two levels from the actual niche page linked above, to get to the comments.

One has to know to first click on the original ballot link, or the appeal ballot link, 2 among 8 history items on that page.  Then once on the on the original ballot link, one is faced with the 'old' problem.  The fact that the comments are hidden in a collapsed tab, for no good reason, on the actual ballot pages.

I am well aware why the niche was down voted - I left a comment why I did it, and it is the same reason three other people gave.  That's not the issue: the issue is that Rose can't be expected to find those comments.

As a newcomer, if it isn't on the Appeals page, why would she imagine there is anything to go digging for elsewhere?  Let alone hidden two levels deep beneath a separate page?

It is her perception we're talking about, not mine.  I know there was never a manifest problem of discrimination here.  But to her, there was every appearance of there being one precisely because you are not using the comments the community is providing.

I respect that you have priorities for development.  I ask you to respect, in return, my decision to no longer post comments on my votes.  It is a waste of my time to do so - they are not getting seen.  The person who appealed the 'LBGTQ' niche rejection may not even be seeing them, judging by the reason given for the appeal!  

I'll start commenting again once there is a point to it - once it actually helps the community.

I agree @Malkazoid that it isn't easy to discover.  I think the problem is that when you hit the Niche page, you see a series of actions related to the Niche...but you wouldn't necessarily expect to find a lot more content related to the Niche hidden by links listed in those events like 'Ballot'.  I think the UI should be re-designed to make important aspects like the ballot of a niche more prominent so the user knows it applies directly to the Niche and can interact with it easily.  Perhaps some tabs on this Niche landing page that users would naturally know apply to the Niche they are looking at?

 

I also think the vote tally UI should be re-done now that a Niche can be rejected for a specific reason.  I personally, selected one of the default rejection reasons as 'misspelling'.  This reason should show up in some sort of short hand notation next to the votes.  This would prevent people from assuming the worst, like discrimination, if the users that vote a default option choose not to leave a comment.  I even like the idea of a graph, with each of the reason types getting a color, so you could see the distribution of the prominent reasons why the Niche was rejected, along with the comments below. 

Hey guys-

Yes, I agree that it can be hard to find things in the current system. Again, hopefully things are much better in the next version... and your feedback here is helping us keep all of that in mind.  Also agree that seeing a breakdown of the rejections reasons for a niche vote would be useful.

Banter posted:

I agree @Malkazoid that it isn't easy to discover.  I think the problem is that when you hit the Niche page, you see a series of actions related to the Niche...but you wouldn't necessarily expect to find a lot more content related to the Niche hidden by links listed in those events like 'Ballot'.  I think the UI should be re-designed to make important aspects like the ballot of a niche more prominent so the user knows it applies directly to the Niche and can interact with it easily.  Perhaps some tabs on this Niche landing page that users would naturally know apply to the Niche they are looking at?

 

I also think the vote tally UI should be re-done now that a Niche can be rejected for a specific reason.  I personally, selected one of the default rejection reasons as 'misspelling'.  This reason should show up in some sort of short hand notation next to the votes.  This would prevent people from assuming the worst, like discrimination, if the users that vote a default option choose not to leave a comment.  I even like the idea of a graph, with each of the reason types getting a color, so you could see the distribution of the prominent reasons why the Niche was rejected, along with the comments below. 

Great stuff.

The thing that is mysterious to me is that this comments problem has been on our radar for months now.

It is easy to fix - just take the comments out of their hidey-box, and show them right on the ballot page in some shape or form.  Like a big SEE ALL VOTE COMMENTS, that if expanded, lists them all.  The same could be applied to the Appeals page.  I doubt it would take a developer more than an hour to make this happen, and meanwhile the Alpha is in full swing, with 1000 new people a week coming in...  

Charts and fancier solutions will be even better (and I think the idea is fantastic), but we could do something easy right now...  For months, nobody has chosen to do so.

The latest Narrative at work says:

"Lastly, there were some other enhancements and bug fixes delivered in the Narrative Alpha."

It isn't apparent to me what those were.  Perhaps we should have an actual issues/feature request tracker in place?

Anyway, no hard feelings on my behalf Narrative: just a pragmatic decision to stop posting comments until they can actually be found.

Hi @Ted, I agree with @Malkazoid this a subject to easy to be turned against us and than the damage is already done. We can use this to turn it for us, by explicited reply on her Twitter message that we immediately took action, show we take this seriously by resolving the problem show the full comments in a easy way and show a graph of the votes easy and simple, something like this:

Screenshot_20180801-235503_Chrome

Sorry for the Dutch language, but you get the picture. With this we make very clear we understand and take care of problems!

We are Narrative.

Attachments

Photos (1)
Dana posted:

Oops, sorry about that. I jumped the gun on that one without reading comments. Won't happen again!

You've helped us realise the comment should be more visible, and also present on the appeals page.  

In fact there should probably be a comments step within the process of making an appeal, that displays the comments and gets the appealer to acknowledge them before getting to file the appeal.

With a bit of luck the @Narrative Network Team will improve the process thanks to you.

So, this seems to have been a bit of a drama that could have been avoided. I get that efforts are currently being put towards the new version, but there is indisputably a gap between now and that happening. So it seems to me that there needs to be a quick fix solution, at the very least. It's not by any means beyond the bounds of possibility that something like this will happen again. 

A stitch in time saves nine. 

Add Reply

×
×
×
×