The unofficial OP2 design council

[3_bit]

So I noticed a few users seem to be pretty good with concepting the OP2 and other things. I think this thread should serve as an application area for those wishing to be a part of the OP2 unofficial design council. I will definitely not be in charge of such things nor would I want to, I just think a more organized committee that is community-voted on might help progress the OP2. If you want to be a part of the committee, please mention what you want to do on it and why. Chances are there will be a poll for all positions of the committee shortly where members will vote in applicants. This isn't against the rules to post (last time I checked) and even though it isn't a rumor, it will be helpful to the OP2 design since as far as we know ED and all the other people on the Official OP team are busy with their stuff. It wouldn't be any fun if the OP2 wasn't created by the community as the OP1 was, right?

List of positions (so far)

Head poster (official unofficial design releases)

PCB concepting

Concept art/ 3D paper cutouts

Researcher (for parts, community polls, etc.)

add a position that you think should be a part of this.

 

[overgauss]

Hrrm.  This seems like a good idea. You just need people to  commit.  Most people are slow to commit unless they see that others have committed.  However, committing seems like work and those that like to theorycraft won't buy in because it seems like work.

So now you need to figure out how to get people to commit.  Once a threshold of critical inertia is met, more people will buy in due to actual thread activity and be more prone to theorycraft.  My suggestion is to start small by identifying the one thing you can get the most buy in from.  After a time it will become necessary to branch off and discuss the remainder of things needing discussion.

To start, I think you need at least 2 non-biased arbitrators to help manage/poll the expectations of what the next P2 should be.  Those that arbitrate would foster discussion and help move it along.  Perhaps large features could be discussed and spun off into their own threads.  Afterwards a summary could be presented.  As new points are discussed and drilled downwards towards, the summary thread is updated.

For instance:  Clamshell vs convertible.  Post the results in the summary thread. 720p vs 1080p.  Post the results in the summary thread.  You might even start a thread that asks where should we even start!  Someone might think that the SoC is obviously the place to start, etc.  Once a list of topics is developed, we can concentrate on the first topic.  Once discussion there is going good, introduce the next topic.  The summary thread should have links to each topic as they are introduced.

If there is contention in the summary thread, direct the posters to the respective thread where their opinion is better suited/warranted. I also think that a standard of discussion would need to be devised.  Claims that can't be substantiated would be discouraged when the unsubstantiated claims are backed up with more unsubstantiated claims, as an example.

Assuming that I am entirely wrong about this procedure, I would still urge that we start off small, generate discussion, and move forward from there.  This is an open source project afterall and it would seem that an opensource procedure would be suitable to discuss said project.

 

[ShleeDragon]

http://boards.openpandora.org/index.php/topic/12205-realistic-mockup-the-dragonfly-by-two-months-inc/