EPA Weekly - February 17, 2022
Created
Feb 17, 2022
Submissions Folder
Editing Framework
Attendees
Announcements
March for Words starts next week
PLM work group wants to do a session with the EPA. Rene suggested March 3. We’d have to do it earlier in the day because Rene is in a timezone where the regular EPA meeting would be in the middle of the night.
- We’re looking at the 1st week of March during the same time as the alternate EPA meeting
- Links asked if this is a retrospective meeting or a long term planning meeting. He explained that it will most likely retrospective
- Ap0ll0 asked if Links could switch with Rene and facilitate our meeting
- He explained that it would conflict since he participates in this projects.
Discussion
March for Words is coming up! Starting February 21
- Should we schedule “shut up and write” times? Would you all go to those?
- Hiro explained that this is a great idea. He said it was a success when they did this the other day.
- Apollo, what’s the word on budget for adding more $$ on top?
- We’ve published 10 articles so far in S3.
- 6 in Jan, 4 so far in Feb
- The budget is for 30 during the season.
- It doesn’t look like there’s extra left to add - we’re not that far behind our projections
- Sam proposed that we include any extra earnings on our S4 funding request and retro pay it to the writers
- Ap0ll0 suggested we use some of our stables to incentivize due to BANK’s current price action.
- Ultimately, we want to continue to diversify our treasury. We could increase our ask amount to GC in S4 and retro pay authors
- We want to also increase the length of submitted articles - word count
- Should we scale the reward based on number of words? Currently 2 BANK per word with a cap of 3K BANK
- We need to flesh out a marketing or promotion campaign
- Maybe have DAO Heat promote for us?
Article ideas list:
- We need to work on listing out ideas on the doc above.
- What are some bDAO history ideas to put on Mirror?
Mentee program
- Quality process: we need a quality assurance process so we can properly evaluate mentees when the time comes
- Links’s idea from very short alt time zone meeting: Need to first implement it on the Editors Circle, then implement on mentees
- Author and secondary editor both give a “rating” on the primary edit?
- 1-10 score
- Author gives 1-10 on the quality of the edits and secondary editor gives a quality rating based on the piece coming in
- Hiro is worried that this would be counterproductive
- Maybe we can have the staff editors all look at the mentees’ work to see how it is in the comment/suggestion phase
- How do we set the bar for good” editing?
- Possibly a vote between staff editors on if the mentee “Graduates”
- Are we doing 1-1 mentorship relationships? How “deep” is that relationship?
- At the end of the season, we have mentees do an edit for everyone
- Dissertation-type thing, “defend your edits on this piece”
- How do we decide when the mentees become a staff editor? Because people won’t all be able to “flood” the staff editors group
- Need some kind of incentive for mentees to go through
- Maybe we only bring on mentees when there’s gonna be a spot?
Action item
Sam: ask Rene to switch w someone else for PLM workgroup meeting
Sam: Set up the bonus scale for March For Words and prepare to submit it as part of S4 budget request