pie chart with the people who contributed during the last month.

[bhaugen]

From Fabio Balli:

Another idea in the project overview :

To have a pie with the people who contributed during the last month. Idea : to balance the "older" with the "active". :)

[Vegasvikk]

Is the pie chart an incentive to contribute more through mild psychological peer pressure or ? What would be its underlying purpose, and what are the expected results of publicizing contributions?

[gcassel]

A pie chart showing the breakdown of contributions during the last 30 days, or (worse) a calendar month, would create a rather coarse and unnecessarily arbitrary emphasis.

It's easy to show the overall contribution rate for a project, or the contribution rate per individual, with something analogous to Github's "Contributions" graph. In a project with lots of contributors, however, it would be difficult to visually aggregate every individual's contribution rates in a single, lossless graph. Here's one possible route, which I'll describe in some detail, because I don't have time to mock it up.

Every contribution could be displayed as a single block in a smoothly scalable graph covering the entire history of the project. Each 'contribution-block' could be generated using a tiny vector (scalable) version of the relevant user's profile icon. Each block could be stacked vertically per horizontal divisions which would change in their scale depending on the current view of the graph. (I.e., a single vertical column might represent a month or more in the fully zoomed-out view of an immensely long project, but it could indicate one day or less in a zoomed-in view.)

During times of intense and diverse activity, the complete graph (i.e., visually 'zoomed out' to cover the project's history) may fail to visually register individual contributions in a legible way. However, users could zoom in to focus on periods of one month or less, enabling the graph to vertically scale to one screen (or more) in height. At such scales, individual contribution-blocks should visually register, although unique icons may not fully visually register at tiny scales. (People could, if desired, try to use profile icons which had distinctive colors or patterns at tiny scales.)

Developing such a graph feature would certainly be more complex than enabling pie charts for weekly, monthly, or any other arbitrary summaries of contributions. However, it could be an essentially 'once and done' thing, which then puts the data visualization experience under the creative control of each user. If any individuals ever wanted to highlight a perceived trend, they could of course screenshot a specific instance of graph-viewing and share it to a group.

Please tell me if this doesn't make sense; I'm rushing a bit here, but sociometric visualizations are one of my key interests.

BTW, it'd be relatively simple to allow each viewer to construct pie charts on the fly per user-selected periods of time. I think my suggestion above is more interesting and potentially helpful, so I put that first.

[TiberiusB]

Vickie,

Let's have a discussion and curate it here http://valuenetwork.referata.com/wiki/Feedback_system

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 8:50 PM, Vickie Comrie notifications@github.com wrote:

Is the pie chart an incentive to contribute more through mild psychological peer pressure or ? What would be its underlying purpose, and what are the expected results of publicizing contributions?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/valnet/valuenetwork/issues/451#issuecomment-160237249 .

t!b! http://www.google.com/profiles/tiberius.brastaviceanu co-founder of SENSORICA http://www.sensorica.co, an open, decentralized and self-organizing value network (an open enterprise)

founder of Multitude Project http://multitudeproject.blogspot.ca/

Google Profile https://plus.google.com/117593809719446924575/about Facebook Tiberius Brastaviceanu http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000279944184 Twitter @TiberiusB http://twitter.com/TiberiusB

[TiberiusB]

I think we need to have this discussion with those who are on the ground, establishing real networks, putting real people together to work on projects, and build tools to support them. The input of these people is extremely valuable, They know what they need, and that makes th software better.

Just trying to establish some roles here and point to their importance.

This is never over stressed. More often than not programmers make their own assumptions and decisions, don't consult enough with those who are doing the actual work with the tool they develop.

I am copying Fabio here to provide more insight on the problem is is trying to solve with this piechart. If he requested it, that it because as a community builder he must have a reason. Instead of us trying to guess that problem, let's hear Fabio...

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Greg Cassel notifications@github.com wrote:

A pie chart showing the breakdown of contributions during the last 30 days, or (worse) a calendar month, would create a rather coarse and unnecessarily arbitrary emphasis.

It's easy to show the overall contribution rate for a project, or the contribution rate per individual, with something analogous to Github's "Contributions" graph. In a project with lots of contributors, however, it would be difficult to visually aggregate every individual's contribution rates in a single, lossless graph. Here's one possible route, which I'll describe in some detail, because I don't have time to mock it up.

Every contribution could be displayed as a single block in a smoothly scalable graph covering the entire history of the project. Each 'contribution-block' could be generated using a tiny vector (scalable) version of the relevant user's profile icon. Each block could be stacked vertically per horizontal divisions which would change in their scale depending on the current view of the graph. (I.e., a single vertical column might represent a month or more in the fully zoomed-out view of an immensely long project, but it could indicate one day or less in a zoomed-in view.)

During times of intense and diverse activity, the complete graph (i.e., visually 'zoomed out' to cover the project's history) may fail to visually register individual contributions in a legible way. However, users could zoom in to focus on periods of one month or less, enabling the graph to vertically scale to one screen (or more) in height. At such scales, individual contribution-blocks should visually register, although unique icons may not fully visually register at tiny scales. (People could, if desired, try to use profile icons which had distinctive colors or patterns at tiny scales.)

Developing such a graph feature would certainly be more complex than enabling pie charts for weekly, monthly, or any other arbitrary summaries of contributions. However, it could be an essentially 'once and done' thing, which then puts the data visualization experience under the creative control of each user. If any individuals ever wanted to highlight a perceived trend, they could of course screenshot a specific instance of graph-viewing and share it to a group.

Please tell me if this doesn't make sense; I'm rushing a bit here, but sociometric visualizations are one of my key interests.

BTW, it'd be relatively simple to allow each viewer to construct pie charts on the fly per user-selected periods of time. I think my suggestion above is more interesting and potentially helpful, so I put that first.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/valnet/valuenetwork/issues/451#issuecomment-160454506 .

t!b! http://www.google.com/profiles/tiberius.brastaviceanu co-founder of SENSORICA http://www.sensorica.co, an open, decentralized and self-organizing value network (an open enterprise)

founder of Multitude Project http://multitudeproject.blogspot.ca/

Google Profile https://plus.google.com/117593809719446924575/about Facebook Tiberius Brastaviceanu http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000279944184 Twitter @TiberiusB http://twitter.com/TiberiusB

[gcassel]

I agree @TiberiusB that the input of people on the ground is extremely valuable. I only agree about halfway with 'they know what they need', which puts me in a strange place-- because most times, I'm the one arguing that coders make too many assumptions about real communities and real needs.

What we all need IMO is a rich dialogue between users, potential users, and designers. Of course, if someone is tailoring a product to a specific client, that's what they must focus upon, both practically and ethically.

[TiberiusB]

Sure, there is an art to translate the user's need into technical requirements, and inform the user about what is possible or impossible. Sometimes the user wants something that is not the thing he needs.

I just find it strange that this discussion about Fabio's need takes place somewhere where Fabio might not even have access, he might not even know that this discussion exists.

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Greg Cassel notifications@github.com wrote:

I agree @TiberiusB https://github.com/TiberiusB that the input of people on the ground is extremely valuable. I only agree about halfway with 'they know what they need', which puts me in a strange place-- because most times, I'm the one arguing that coders make too many assumptions about real communities and real needs.

What we all need IMO is a rich dialogue between users, potential users, and designers. Of course, if someone is tailoring a product to a specific client, that's what they must focus upon, both practically and ethically.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/valnet/valuenetwork/issues/451#issuecomment-160463388 .

t!b! http://www.google.com/profiles/tiberius.brastaviceanu co-founder of SENSORICA http://www.sensorica.co, an open, decentralized and self-organizing value network (an open enterprise)

founder of Multitude Project http://multitudeproject.blogspot.ca/

Google Profile https://plus.google.com/117593809719446924575/about Facebook Tiberius Brastaviceanu http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000279944184 Twitter @TiberiusB http://twitter.com/TiberiusB

[gcassel]

It is strange yes though not unusual. I don't know that Bob intended it when he registered the issue. I'd agree strongly that it's good for discussion to occur, or to be aggregated into, an inclusive place.

[bhaugen]

@gcassel I just posted an issue that Fabio raised.

My personal preference here is that people take the raw data, which I can help them get if they don't know how to do it, and do some charting experiments. Have fun, find out what works.

[TiberiusB]

Hi

Just to jump on the question I got per e-mail (I'm not following on GItHub).

My idea for asking a chart about contributors of the last two months is based on my experience with Breathing Games.

There have been people in the project who did a major contribution (10 to 30 % of all time). But some of these people haven't shown up in the last year.

There have also been people committed to the project, present at each meeting, fostering the project in the last months.

Thus, the problem is that the current chart does not value the active contributors.

My aim is to have both graph, one showing the global, and one showing the active people.

Best,

Fabio Balli Follow me on Twitter http://twitter.com/#%21/fabioballi, LinkedIn https://ca.linkedin.com/in/fabioballi/en, fabioballi.net http://www.fabioballi.net/en

[TiberiusB]

Fabio, what if we extend your questions to something that can respond to your perceived needs AND more.

Example of dashboard charts http://www.jscharting.com/Samples/JavaScript_Dashboard_Green_Chart.htm We can design a dashboard for a project page, based our ideas about how this would impact agent motivation, agent orientation, risk mitigation, monitoring and intervention...

Here's a dynamic composit chart, replace the Q-s with months, and every bar represents a contributor. http://www.jscharting.com/Samples/Javascript_DynamicData_Chart.htm

This dynamic chart has navigation (in time) http://www.jscharting.com/Samples/Javascript_NavigatorToolbar_Chart.htm So you can zoom into a timezone to have more detail.

The one that I like the most, is the motion chart https://developers.google.com/chart/interactive/docs/gallery/motionchart?hl=en

Another nice example here https://code.google.com/p/google-motion-charts-with-r/

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 10:08 PM, Fabio Balli info@fabioballi.net wrote:

Hi

Just to jump on the question I got per e-mail (I'm not following on GItHub).

My idea for asking a chart about contributors of the last two months is based on my experience with Breathing Games.

There have been people in the project who did a major contribution (10 to 30 % of all time). But some of these people haven't shown up in the last year.

There have also been people committed to the project, present at each meeting, fostering the project in the last months.

Thus, the problem is that the current chart does not value the active contributors.

My aim is to have both graph, one showing the global, and one showing the active people.

Best,

Fabio Balli Follow me on Twitter http://twitter.com/#%21/fabioballi, LinkedIn https://ca.linkedin.com/in/fabioballi/en, fabioballi.net http://www.fabioballi.net/en

t!b! http://www.google.com/profiles/tiberius.brastaviceanu co-founder of SENSORICA http://www.sensorica.co, an open, decentralized and self-organizing value network (an open enterprise)

founder of Multitude Project http://multitudeproject.blogspot.ca/

Google Profile https://plus.google.com/117593809719446924575/about Facebook Tiberius Brastaviceanu http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000279944184 Twitter @TiberiusB http://twitter.com/TiberiusB

[bhaugen]

More about the discussion about Fabio's issue: he discussed it with me in an email. I told him I would raise a github issue so it would not be forgotten, because I could not work on it right away and the charts had other issues that I would prefer to consider at the same time. Before I start to work on it, I will reconnect with Fabio. If you know a better way to handle software issues, please suggest it.

P.S. the motion graphs are nice-looking, but require Flash, which imposes a proprietary software dependency.

[TiberiusB]

Here's an example of data from a current project in SENSORICA https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ezjVX4-tWY8ptOIyjGzpw_0xGqNgCW3aH5q-7nxLHrw/edit#gid=162995459&vpid=A17

On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 9:17 AM, Bob Haugen notifications@github.com wrote:

More about the discussion about Fabio's issue: he discussed it with me in an email. I told him I would raise a github issue so it would not be forgotten, because I could not work on it right away and the charts had other issues that I would prefer to consider at the same time. Before I start to work on it, I will reconnect with Fabio. If you know a better way to handle software issues, please suggest it.

P.S. the motion graphs are nice-looking, but require Flash, which imposes a proprietary software dependency.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/valnet/valuenetwork/issues/451#issuecomment-160642349 .

t!b! http://www.google.com/profiles/tiberius.brastaviceanu co-founder of SENSORICA http://www.sensorica.co, an open, decentralized and self-organizing value network (an open enterprise)

founder of Multitude Project http://multitudeproject.blogspot.ca/

Google Profile https://plus.google.com/117593809719446924575/about Facebook Tiberius Brastaviceanu http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000279944184 Twitter @TiberiusB http://twitter.com/TiberiusB

[bhaugen]

I can add a chart with the last month or two months very soon. Got it roughed out.

Should I do it? Just consider if a placeholder until everybody decides what they really want.

[TiberiusB]

I personally like more a continuous solution, a dynamic chart with a time slider. There are a few examples above... but I think Bob said that some of them use Flash. The division one month and the rest is kind of arbitrary. Some projects are pretty fast, like the Sensor Networks - only 3 weeks. So in this case it doesn't make sense. The Governance document reflects that speed of action too.

Flexibility, because the environment is very dynamic.

I don't know what is the best tool for this.

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Bob Haugen notifications@github.com wrote:

I can add a chart with the last month or two months very soon. Got it roughed out.

Should I do it? Just consider if a placeholder until everybody decides what they really want.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/valnet/valuenetwork/issues/451#issuecomment-162080115 .

t!b! http://www.google.com/profiles/tiberius.brastaviceanu co-founder of SENSORICA http://www.sensorica.co, an open, decentralized and self-organizing value network (an open enterprise)

founder of Multitude Project http://multitudeproject.blogspot.ca/

Google Profile https://plus.google.com/117593809719446924575/about Facebook Tiberius Brastaviceanu http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000279944184 Twitter @TiberiusB http://twitter.com/TiberiusB

[bhaugen]

The best tool for all this stuff is to let you guys create your own charts from the raw data. I went looking for online charting tools, but didn't find much that was really good. That would give everybody max flexibility per project, and be more fun, and take it off my plate. I'll keep looking, and maybe you all could, too?

[bhaugen]

But to repeat, I got two charts roughed out: last 2 months and forever. And put all the charts on top of all the other stuff on that page. If you want it, it can be deployed in the next update, with a bunch of stuff Lynn is working on. Or not. Consider it a placeholder.

[fdurville]

I think a chart of the last 2 months would be nice. FD

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 4:07 PM, Bob Haugen notifications@github.com wrote:

But to repeat, I got two charts roughed out: last 2 months and forever. And put all the charts on top of all the other stuff on that page. If you want it, it can be deployed in the next update, with a bunch of stuff Lynn is working on. Or not. Consider it a placeholder.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/valnet/valuenetwork/issues/451#issuecomment-162082124 .