Continuity in components

Simonas Zilinskas 03/02/2023 14:48

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

Currently when transitioning from “proposals” to “budgets” or to “accountability”, the cards lose their link with the proposers. Proposers lose the possibility to edit/contribute to the proposals, manage info on them, report on their progress, etc. This blocks a number of interesting behaviours in participatory budgeting and other types of participatory exercises.

Describe the solution you'd like
The solution would be to produce this continuity by tying the components more closely together and maintaining the permissions of project proposers. Tracability is a core feature of Decidim and it is lacking in this regard, so we would love to stat a debate on the solution and make it happen.

Funded by
Can be in-part or fully financed by clients of OSP. We received this demand many times so we could probably collect the necessary funds. However, if you'd like to make it happen faster by co-deving it or co-financing it - let us know and let’s do it all together.

Comentari

Detalls del comentari

Més ben valorats

Recent

Més antic

Més discutit

Estàs veient un sol comentari

Mostra tots els comentaris

aproximadament 1 any

I agree very much with @Pops. I think the versioning controls are enough to trace the changes in the proposals even if they are modified after an answer (accept/reject). Most of the times it's not even a "nice to have", it's more of a "must have" for the municipalities. The proposals can change during the process when workshops are arranged, etc. And also some proposals can be accepted conditionally and their content may need to be modified when this happens, even when the admins can include the conditions within the answer.

It has also always puzzled me that the administrators cannot edit the proposals sent by the participants. I understand the thinking is much different in South Europe than in the Nordics regarding this but this has been a constant pain point as long as we've used Decidim. Therefore, it has even led us developing completely other tools to manage the idea/proposal collection to get around these limitations that the core system is posing on the administrators, i.e. making it impossible for them to perform their work.

I of course think of these issues from very technical perspective but I think the core purpose of Decidim should be to support participation and make the whole process easy on everyone. We should not concentrate on posing any imaginary limitations to administer the participation process. If the admins really want to mess up the process and break their accountability, nothing stops them modifying the content from the database. Decidim should be a flexible system that adapts to each organization's needs, not a system that poses unnecessary limitations to make the process difficult for everyone.

I understand the context where @xabier is coming from but many times it doesn't make much sense from our perspective. Sorry for the (never ending) rant about this topic, I hope this adds something valuable to the discussion as well.

Essencials

Preferències

Analítiques i estadístiques

Màrqueting

Continuity in components

Si us plau, inicia la sessió

Configuració de les galetes

Essencials

Preferències

Analítiques i estadístiques

Màrqueting

Continuity in components

Confirmar

Si us plau, inicia la sessió

Compartir