Hey there, folks. Here today to discuss a topic that's been a long time coming - public staffchat. This discussion was moved here from staffchat in an effort to allow more public discussion on the issue.
First: should staffchat be public at all? Let's examine the advantages and disadvantages.
Pros: public staffchat would make communication between staff and users infinitely easier, rather than having to travel between chats and couriers with the risk of information being lost in translation or muddled by multiple conversations going on at once. It would also, ideally, give users a dedicated space for discussing site policy with staff and providing their own opinions and insight.
Cons: some see public staffchat as an unnecessary security risk. If information that needed to stay secret leaked in public staffchat, then as soon as one person has seen it, it's impossible to keep it a secret anymore. Some technical concerns or high-level staff projects need to remain a secret, and public staffchat would mean we would have to be a lot more careful with what we talk about and where.
An ideal public staffchat situation should accomplish three goals: First, give users a way to know what's going on in staff and participate in the process themselves. Second, make sure that staff and users are both protected from being hassled or dogpiled by the other group (as well as by each other). Third, ensure that security for sensitive matters is maintained.
Additionally, public staffchat would change the role of the Recap Team. Currently, we write play-by-plays of basically every discussion that occurs in staffchat, and this work model has proven unsustainable. In public staffchat, we would simply keep a basic record of the start and resolution of discussions, as well as providing a link to the discussion in question for those interested in further reading. This would both lessen the workload on Recap as well as providing a more accurate summary than any recap can provide - the source material itself.
If you have any other advantages or disadvantages that public staffchat may bring, please present them below for discussion.
So let's assume public staffchat happens. So far, I have identified three primary strategies, all with their own advantages and disadvantages:
1. Open Discord server with no channel for user discussion.
This would be very easy to implement and allow for real-time viewing of staffchat by the userbase. However, extreme care would have to be taken with the channels that users would be allowed to see and with the information that is discussed in these channels. Additionally, users would have no dedicated, one-stop-shop location to discuss policy, requiring them to go to other locations, which would be much more difficult for staff to manage.
2. Open Discord with channel for user discussion.
This option is currently my favorite. It would also be quite easy to implement, but would come with issues that option 1 does not have. This option would require staff to moderate the discussion channel - however, this is an easier task than it may sound. As long as we adopt a hardline "no off-topic, don't be a dick" policy, then moderating the channel should be relatively easy. Users would have no casual channels, would only be allowed to speak in a single channel for the single purpose of discussing policy with staff, and would still only be allowed to see very select staff channels. The same care would need to be taken to ensure sensitive information does not leak into non-sensitive channels as with option 1.
3. Bridge between staffchat and other official locations.
This option is an interesting one, and I believe it should be integrated regardless of whether one of the other two proves most viable. It may be more difficult to implement, but it would provide a very public, very easily-accessible record of staffchat in a number of places - the official Discord, 05Command, or any other place we want to send it. There are also methods to delay the bridging of messages, so that if sensitive information does leak into a non-sensitive channel, it could be edited or removed before it's on permanent record. There are issues - the bridge may be unable to automatically record threads or emoji reactions, both of which are pretty important to understanding discussion in staffchat (the former for focused topics, the latter for expressing popular support without making anyone feel dogpiled). However, I feel that this in combination with option 1 or 2 are the optimal method.
EDIT 1: I would like to clarify again that this would only open very select non-sensitive working channels, with the primary point of focus being the #staff-discussion channel. The most likely course of action would be to archive the current #staff-discussion and create a new one to avoid old messages from becoming public without the people sending them at that time being aware of the possibility that they may eventually be made public. No casual or sensitive channels would be opened under this policy.
This thread is meant for discussion of the options presented above or any others that may present themselves. If you have an idea, say it. This discussion will remain open for one week before it is considered to have run its course, at which time I will begin drafting a policy to incorporate the ideas presented.