# Should organizing CivicTechTO be more transparent and/or horizontal WITHIN our membership?

This resource is a first attempt at a relatively lightweight consensus-building framework, for informing fair and inclusive decisions that:
* can theoretically involve more participants
* can make diverse and subtle differences in sentiments more legible
* creates an accessible, historical artefact of a decision-making process
* does not overly favour in-person participation

It is informed by the vTaiwan process and the ORID facilitation framework.^{[1](#references)}

This iteration attempts to tackle the title question above.

**Note on scope:** This conversation is _not_ about transparency outside the organization, ie. public-facing Slack conversations.

### How to participate

[](https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1Jkv1je4KjqFofPnqvkwAIinDmpeVXVWvfeq8JiCUZVg/edit?usp=sharing)

* Phase 1 :star: (you are here)
* Please add **facts** and **feelings** to this shared document.
* Add any **definitions** helpful in supporting those facts/feelings. (Please keep these to 140 characters.)
* Phase 2
* @patcon will transfer feelings into a Pol.is^{[2](#references)} conversation, and link will be shared among organizers.
* Organizers are encouraged to add sentiments to Pol.is throughout this phase.
* Phase 3
* Informed by prior artefacts, have a discussion at the steering committee meeting.

## Definitions

_"organizing channel"_
A Slack channel, `#organize-the-things`.

_"community members"_
General members who have not only attended a hacknight, but are signed up on either Slack or Meetup.

_"organizers"_
Loose group of community members who have been invited into the organizer channel, and help run hacknights (past or present).

_"horizontal"_
Leaning toward a flat organizational structure. Does not necessarily imply lack of leadership.

## Statements

**Legend:**
:mag: Fact
:heart: Feeling
:bulb: Idea

:mag: The organizing channel is a private, invite-only channel.
:mag: Community members can only see the internals of how we organize after explicit invitation to the organizing channel.
:mag: Some conversations are necessarily privileged among (and with) organizers.
:mag: Within `#organize-the-things`, the majority of conversations are not privileged.
:mag: There are successful examples of similar organizations working more transparently and horizontally.^{[3](#references)}

**Feelings** added here don't necessarily need to reflect your own views, but that is preferred since we each understand those best.

:heart: I feel CivicTechTO can be more transparent and horizontal in organizing.
:heart: I feel curious about how organizing could be more transparent.
:heart: I feel curious about how organizing could be more horizontal within the whole of the community.
:heart: I feel that organizing within the organizers group is wonderfully horizontal.
:heart: I feel inspired by the successes of more leaderless and horizontal movements.
:heart: I feel in relation to community transparency, there is minimal need for further action.
:heart: Regardless of possible changes, I currently feel that I am part of a remarkably resilient and horizontal community.
:heart: I feel that having both a private and public organizing-like channel would be too much notification burden.
:heart: I feel like the burden of having a private and public organizer channel is perhaps the cost of organizing in a way that is true to our values.

:bulb: _Please hold ideas for later._

## References

_{1. Document: [Better Facilitation: ORID](http://www.betterevaluation.org/en/evaluation-options/orid)}

_{2. Article: [The Internet Doesn't Have to Be Bad for Democracy](https://www.technologyreview.com/s/607990/the-internet-doesnt-have-to-be-bad-for-democracy/)}

_{3. Article: [Meet G0v, the Open Source, Digital Community Transforming Democracy in Taiwan](http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/40940-meet-g0v-the-open-source-digital-community-transforming-democracy-in-taiwan)}