[18:12:38] tos - Hey Soni. If you're around and available for mentorship work, let me know. [18:13:04] Just ping me whenever you're available-- I'll be around. [19:05:28] hey I_Jethrobot. [19:05:47] I'm around now. Will jst be available in a couple minutes [19:05:55] Ping me if you want to work now [19:06:08] tos - Heya. [19:06:49] Yeah, I'm good to go. [19:07:05] I figure we would just start focusing on the skills list; [19:07:24] Before we work on descriptions though, did you get a chance to read that feedback from Yunshui? [19:08:15] One second, I'll be here in a moment. Just need to deal with a couple things first. [19:08:22] Also yes, I read that feedback [19:08:48] tos - No problem. Take your time. [19:11:07] Fair warning - Its likely I would not be able to edit the Skills sheet because Google Drive has been giving me problems all week. [19:11:55] I only figured how to open the sheet today and still cant edit it. (Something's real buggy about either GDrive or me) [19:13:58] Oh, that's unfortunate. : ( [19:14:33] I don't suppose it has anything to do with the Google account you're using to access it? [19:15:10] Doubt it. I used it in Incognito and another account, but still way giving same issues [19:15:12] I can see it's only being shared with the.original.soni@gmailc.om address, and not the other one you maintain; are you on that other account? [19:15:24] oops, typo on that e-mail address. [19:15:59] I mean its giving me issues for all GDocs, not just the Reimagining Mentorshop proposal [19:16:15] Hm, OK. [19:16:34] A lot of what I save is on the Drive, so its been a pain :/ [19:17:49] Yeah. Hey, I just noticed you popped up on the list of skills spreadsheet. [19:18:40] So, I figure we should start with Yunshui's e-mail. [19:18:50] Yes. [19:19:25] So, I think Yunshu's first point about including a skill on vandalism is pretty wise. [19:19:26] I'll probably be unable to edit it, but hopefully there'll be a way to sort that out. [19:19:43] Agreed. It was something I missed when making the list. [19:19:52] Yeah, I missed that too. [19:20:09] So, I'll add something on it right now... [19:20:47] "Any bad edit done to Wikipedia is Vandalism. This section covers what is vandalism, and what's not and how to deal with them" [19:21:15] Yeah. I honestly think learning about vandalism could be considered a "beginner" skill, too. [19:22:07] It certainly looks like a basic skill but I think it would fit more with intermediate [19:23:11] Because anyone who is a WikiGnome might be able to carry on editing without requiring the Vandalism lesson. Hence end up being not in Beginners skillset [19:23:28] under my rule of thumb, that is. [19:25:02] Yeah, but to speak to Yunshui's point, a lot of editors starting out will want to learn about how to deal with vandalism. [19:25:53] And other than some basic understanding of markup, I don't think a lot of background is needed to understand how to identify vandalism. [19:27:21] Having tried out some vandal fighting, I would disagree. A lot of it falls in the grey zone and vandal fighting also calls upon knowledge of sourcing in several occasions [19:27:53] * Vandal fighting the activity, not the skill we're learning. [19:29:48] Given we've added deletion basics, consensus basics and similar tasks under Intermediate, I think it will be wiser to fit vandalism basics there. [19:30:17] Yeah, actually, I think you are right. Now that I think about the times I used to patrol recent changes, there were a lot of non-obvious cases. [19:30:34] So, we'll file this under intermediate. [19:31:28] +1. Meanwhile I'm confident I'll be unable to edit, so please bear with me for this. I'm still trying to fix it. [19:31:52] Sure thing. It's OK if you won't be able to edit directly today. [19:32:05] Thanks [19:32:10] But keep on trying if you think there's a way. : ) [19:32:19] Yes, on it. [19:33:35] I'm going to slightly rephrase your the term "bad edit" in your description, because it can mean a lot of things to a new editor, some of which might not be considered vandalism. [19:33:54] *slightly rephrase the term [19:33:56] Yeah sure. [19:38:47] What do you think in terms of prerequisites? [19:39:01] Is there any way we can try and make "intentionally distruptive" to be less verbose? [19:39:37] Yeah, let me think about that... [19:39:38] V, AGF+ [19:40:21] Probably BRD+ too, but not sure. [19:42:11] tos - I think BRD is more about the article building process, whereas vandalism is about dealing with abusive edits, so I think we'll leave that one out. [19:43:32] So, the reason I used that phrasing is because it's important to note that vandalism is intentional abuse. It's not a mistake, and it's not sourced content you disagree with. [19:44:06] So, I'm trying to think of a phrasing that gets across the idea that it's purposeful. [19:44:26] Sure. Vandal figting the task tended to also require BRD to an extent, so I wasn't sure if it was out. [19:45:00] "intentionally bad"? [19:49:41] I have an issue with bad in that it's a broad term; it can refer to the quality of the phrasing for instance. I think most editors will understand what is meant by "intentionally disruptive." [19:50:52] Actually, nevermind. Let's go with it for now. I'm going back-and-forth on this too much. [19:51:02] Yes. [19:51:25] We could carry on and then make changes as needed [19:51:36] Right. [19:51:49] So, more on Yunshui's e-mail; he suggested that we add in something on Twinkle. [19:52:11] Again, I agree. [19:52:44] I noted that we have a lesson on Huggle; I thought it'd make sense to group Twinkle in with Huggle and change it more into a "vandalism tools" lesson. [19:53:03] Advanced - Technical - Tools will make sense [19:53:30] Granted, Twinkle does lots of things aside from vandalism, so we could make them separate as well. [19:54:24] How about making Twinkle as a separate lesson but keeping the vandalism fighting portion of Twinkle covered in the Vandal fighting lesson? [19:56:35] So, you want to incorporate Twinkle in the Intermediate lesson? [19:57:05] Or should it wait until the Advanced one? [19:57:52] Hmm I guess either would do fine. Most of actions performed via twinkle are just easy ways to apply the tasks done in other skills. [19:59:15] So as long as mentees know that they should be familiar with the policies before trying out Deletion tagging, Welcoming users or Rollback, Twinkle could be a useful tool in Intermediate. [20:00:25] tos - OK. I'll make a note of that here; I think ultimately it will be up to the mentor to decide whether Twinkle is appropriate for a given learner. [20:00:42] Yes. [20:02:51] There also seem to be no such pre-requisites for Twinkle. [20:04:04] That's true, but WP:TWINKLEABUSE makes it pretty clear that mistakes are not OK. [20:04:52] So, I think it should be pretty clear that editor know what they're doing with vandalism before they start using it, even if there are no hard requirements. [20:05:25] Yes. Hence our mentors should come in handy in getting that point across via their lessons. [20:05:39] Definitely. [20:05:50] OK, so moving on in Yun's e-mail... [20:06:20] He mentions some technical lessons that might be interesting to add related to coding, working on the blacklist, bot design... [20:06:43] I think these are all great ideas. We'll need to see who we can recruit though before we add these in. [20:07:22] I think I have some names who could be willing to work with those [20:08:38] Hey, that's great to hear. [20:08:41] stwalkerster, Legotkm, Technical 13 to name a few. [20:10:10] So, I'll add these ideas in later, but I'll make a note that these are very specialized, and we can only offer them if we get a hold of someone with the right background. [20:10:35] So it might be a good idea to contact them and ask if they'll be willing to help, in which case we could get more ideas on the Specialised lessons and add them in later if necessary. [20:11:09] Yeah, I've been thinking about when the actual recruiting for the space should start. [20:11:37] But I think it's fine to contact more specialized persons early just to get an idea about these specific ideas and others they might be willing to teach if they are interested. [20:11:47] Agreed. [20:12:07] If you want, I can poke stwalkerster right now and see what he thinks :) [20:12:21] The other matter was about having a lesson on "mentoring for adminship." [20:12:25] Yes. [20:13:25] I'm somewhat hesitant about adding this kind of lesson, because I'm not sure that someone can be "mentored" into adminship. It requires a lot of independent work. [20:13:57] The best I can see for that kind of lesson is guiding someone through the various essays and opinions about the RfA process as preparation... [20:14:11] ...or about what can be learned about previous RfAs, perhaps. [20:14:44] Well, the way I see it, anyone who wants to be an admin needs to learn the specifics of some admin-like tasks, like going through UAA requests, or closing AFDs, or gauging consensus and closing discussions. [20:15:09] Yeah, definitely. [20:15:18] These would again be under a category of "Specialisations", to say it that way. [20:16:09] It would not, per se, be considered under "Mentorship for Adminship" but if anyone wants to go through something along those lines, they could do these specialisation courses to get a grip on them. [20:16:53] ^ Thats how I see Yunshui's suggestion wrt our space. [20:17:47] Yeah, I think that's an excellent point. [20:18:25] Though like the other Technical specialisations, we would need experienced admins to help teach those. Luckily, Yunshui fits both under experienced and admin. [20:18:39] So there's lesser searching to do here. [20:19:14] Agreed. [20:19:58] I also think that if a learner comes in, declaring an interest in being an admin, I think mentors will be able to guide them accordingly. [20:20:39] If a completely newer learner comes in and wants to be an admin, I'd personally say its atleast 2 years before they should revisit that thought. [20:20:46] Speaking of which, I actually had plans to do an RfA sometime this year, but I doubt that will happen now with all this IEG business. : ) [20:21:09] tos - Yeah, I'd say many editors are there with you on that one. [20:21:48] Overall, I think it's important we take the Basic to Advanced lessons as a primary priority and the specialisations as a bonus of sorts which will be a ready benefit if we get those done. [20:22:06] OK. [20:23:05] tos - The last point that Yun brings up is about combining lessons... [20:24:49] he specifically mentions deletions, and the fact that we could combine advanced / intermediate versions of topics into one. [20:24:59] (like templates and copyright). [20:26:31] The reason I kept it separate so far is because if you're not involved in the deletion process, you'd still be required to have an idea of how deletion works, but not the details [20:27:08] His point is that, for example, in deletions, you have to know about each of the deletion types to make a good decision about how to deal with an inappropriate article. [20:27:51] So the basic idea that most editors ought to know will be under intermediate, where all the primary points will be covered, while the advanced lesson will cover anything that anyone who wants to go into deletion needs to know [20:28:17] That's true, but I think the idea of the process can be covered in something like "deletion basics." [20:29:25] Yes. [20:30:03] (I was talkign about the combining of intermediate/advanced part of his message) [20:30:09] Right. [20:30:45] So I think we can combine the deletion lessons as an advanced skill and keep the primary points under intermediate. [20:33:06] +1 [20:33:28] OK, just rearranging some things on the sheet... [20:36:39] Btw I poked stwalkerster. He didnt have the time as I suspected but he suggested the names of FastLizard4 and Cyberpower678 as potential help on tech specialisations [20:37:08] I'm familiar with Cyber, but not with FastLizard [20:37:40] I've heard FL's name around, but cant place it right now. [20:39:56] What do you think about combining some of the basic / advanced topics? [20:40:46] e.g. basic copyright and advanced copyright --> copyright? [20:41:58] Basic copyright will cover identifying plagiarism and related topics - How to deal with copyvios and what are ways to not plagiarise [20:42:35] On the other hand, advanced copyright will contain fair use and OTRS permissions and various licensing, which is definitely in advanced [20:43:46] Yeah, I agree, and I think we can make that clear in the descriptions for sure. [20:44:19] Hence I'll say a no for merging the two; as I originally made this list on the very same categorisation (Will everyone need to know it [Beginner] / Will most users need to get a gist of it [Intermediate] / Should only those working in related tasks know about it [Advanced] ) [20:44:28] Agreed. [20:44:51] In terms of templates, what kind of distinction did you have in mind there? [20:45:58] Intermediate = Basics (What is a template) + how to use them + difference between subst and transclusion [20:46:44] Advanced = Designing a template + modifying templates [20:47:27] Excellent. I think that's a good distinction. [20:48:09] OK, so that's about it from Yun's e-mail. He gave some really great feedback. [20:48:23] Yes, completely agreed. [20:49:02] Now, I think we can get started with the descriptions. If you still can't edit, you can just paste your descriptions here, and I'll put them in. [20:49:05] His mail helped cover some of the points that were missed, so it's definitely very useful. [20:49:14] Alright, I'll paste then. [20:49:25] Do you want to start from the top? [20:49:30] And I'll start from the bottom? [20:49:40] Alright. [20:50:13] I'm not worried about making the descriptions perfect right now, so we'll worry about exact phrasing later on. [20:50:13] I'll check out the ones that are done and then start pasting descriptions here [20:50:22] Alright, sure [20:54:18] "While adding information to Wikipedia, editors must only rely on the sources without interpretation of their own, or Original Research" [20:56:56] "Learn more about how to move pages on Wikipedia, what are redirects and how to make them" [21:02:44] "Building an encyclopedia is more important than the rules to govern it. This lesson covers 'Ignore all rules', an important Wikipedia policy" - IAR [21:07:00] Direct copying of content from other locations is called Plagiarism, and is strictly forbidden on Wiki. Learn more about what it is, and what a 'copyright violation' means [21:08:23] Pages can be deleted from Wikipedia via a number of processes. This section covers the basics of what deletion is, and how it is done. [21:10:38] Wikipedia has a set of fixed rules or policies, which guide how articles should be written. Know more about how to use them and find the appropriate policy for the question. [21:11:35] (Note - I think S-B and V could be merged into a single topic.) [21:11:51] *should be [21:13:03] There are multiple locations on Wikipedia to discuss general policy and best practises, other than articles. Learn more about them and how they function. [21:14:27] tos - Got it. [21:15:09] tos - For that matter, I think RS can also be combined with those as well. [21:16:07] What do you think? [21:18:47] Well its similar to how Intermediate and Advanced skills are laid out. Everyone must know what sources are and how impotant they are in making articles, but not every editor will have to learn how to find go source-hunting for RS, so to say [21:21:18] I_Jethrobot, ^ [21:22:57] Yes, but once you know how to differentiate between reliable and less reliable sources, actually finding them doesn't seem like much more to teach. [21:24:07] I don't think it needs its own lesson per se. [21:25:14] Plus, I think editors who are interested in article writing, article improvements, and a variety of article discussion would benefit from learning how to find them. [21:25:23] So, I believe it's broadly applicable. [21:25:44] My personal opinion is that it is very different. The specific reason I think Finding sources should be different because its specifically an intermediate skill, not beginner (unlike V and S-B) [21:28:35] So, sequentially, it definitely makes sense for them to learn about how we define this different kinds of sources first, then teach about how to find them. [21:28:42] these* [21:29:22] But I don't see any real harm in making this all part of the same lesson. [21:32:08] Well I guess I'm good with them being merged then. [21:32:51] Though a second opinion wouldnt hurt before we decide if RS is really that small a lesson (I'm of the opinion it isnt) [21:34:46] Sure. I'll leave a comment on there about whether to separate these concepts out for now, and we'll get some feedback from the team at our next meeting. [21:35:34] +1. Now let me get back to the descriptions then. [21:40:17] "Every decision on Wikipedia is made through judging based on policies and strong arguments, a process known as Consensus. This section explains how it works and how decisions are made." [21:40:48] WikiLove and Barnstars are one of many ways to recognizing and appreciating other editors' hardwork. [21:44:32] There are some actions on Wikipedia only restricted to editors having a certain permission or 'editing right'. Know more about these rights and what they are. [21:48:58] To simplify articles and avoid repetition of information. This section covers how to use them, what are parameters and the different ways to use a template. [21:49:21] ^ Scratch that. [21:50:33] Templates are used to simplify articles and avoid repetition of information. This section introduces templates and parameters and explains the different ways to use a template [21:51:02] tos - Got it, thanks. [21:51:36] Learn how to upload an image on Wikipedia and whether you should, or are permitted to [21:54:06] Manual of Style is a set of guidelines for making all articles clear, consistent and precise, and make reading Wikipedia easier. [21:55:48] Manual of Style is a set of guidelines that all editors should follow for writing all articles clearly, consistently and precisely, and help making reading Wikipedia easier. [21:55:54] ^ Edited version [21:57:48] tos - Got it, will update it in a moment. [21:57:50] Learn more about Wikipedia policies and how to apply them to make and support any edit or argument made on Wikipedia. [22:00:51] This section helps you learn the best ways of citing sources, or adding them to articles in a way that other editors understand better. [22:01:03] ^ CITE [22:03:13] Based on their quality, articles on Wikipedia can be graded under several ratings, including 'Good Article' or 'Featured Article', the highest quality possible. Know more about them and the process how they're given [22:07:12] I_Jethrobot, verifiablity and RS are merged under the header "V-RS". Do you think "S-B" will suit it better? Also, you forgot to remove V-RS from "Leads to" for V-RS [22:08:59] Thanks, forgot to remove some of those replacements. [22:09:12] S-B stands for what, again? [22:09:20] Source - Basics. [22:09:35] *Sources [22:10:43] Yeah, I think that's fine considering we have S-I [22:11:26] OK, just did a quick search-and-replace changing V-RS to S-B. [22:11:33] +1 [22:14:30] Alright, we did it! We've got descriptions done. [22:14:34] Nice work. [22:14:59] Yes! [22:15:26] S-I is still up for merge discussion for later though [22:15:41] Yeah. [22:16:09] Also, one other comment I made a while back was about the "using the search bar / shortcuts." [22:16:48] I dont see the comment right now, so can u paste it here? [22:18:26] Sure. Specifically it was whether we might consider condensing that section with the "introduction to Wikipedia" section. [22:19:04] Maybe not so much on "shortcuts," but using the search bar seems pretty fundamental to using Wikipedia, no matter what you're doing. [22:19:40] And could be incorporated there, maybe. I'm not entirely sure it's a great idea now that I've had some time to consider it... [22:20:13] Hmm... I agree... Though a few other sections are similar in the sense that they might as well be a tutorial instead of a mentorship lesson [22:20:25] Specifically 1-2-3-4-12-14-16. [22:21:15] Also 15 [22:23:13] What do you think about those sections and mentorship wise how good they are as a lesson. [22:23:22] Well, whether something should be mentored or not is a different issue; I agree that there are definitely good tutorials for these concepts. [22:24:41] Indeed. But my primary question is if they will be good as mentorship lessons [22:25:06] Or are we open to converting some of the introductions to tutorials or similar [22:25:51] Seeing as this is a mentorship space we are creating, I think learners should still have a mentor. I think mentors are welcome to use some of these tutorials as a part of their teaching, but I don't think we should just direct editors to those tutorials and leave them without a mentor. [22:26:54] Even with these early concepts. [22:27:15] Alright. I dont completely follow but maybe some clarification in the future will be helpful. [22:28:55] To rephrase it, I think our primary goal here should be to offer editors who come into this space a chance to interact one-on-one with a mentor, no matter what they want to learn about. [22:29:31] I see. That makes some sense. [22:29:48] Actually a lot of sense [22:29:55] I think being able to direct editors to helpful tutorials is something pretty well covered by IRC, The Teahouse, etc. [22:30:37] Speaking of which, I think we have come up with a name for the space. [22:31:25] Yes, agreed. The only hesitation I have about it is if mentorship will be better than tutorials for some of these lessons, specially the introductory ones. [22:31:42] What is it? [22:31:57] We're thinking of calling it the Co-op, short for the Wikipedia Cooperative. [22:33:22] And I actually wanted to get your feedback on the term "co-op." What does that term convey to you? [22:33:47] (Just on your initial impressions.) [22:34:01] Initial impression - Pretty vague. [22:34:29] But once I understand the explanation, it looks like an apt name. [22:34:35] Sure, let me explain. [22:37:11] So, I wanted to develop a name that expressed a few concepts I had floating around in my head: Trust, working together, and a friendly and open space were a few of them. [22:39:14] The term "co-op" can refer to a group that volunteers and works together for mutual benefits. [22:39:16] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-op [22:40:39] They sometimes refer to small grocery stores that sell locally-sourced food and funds other local businesses or organizations, for instance. [22:41:10] I see. It makes sense then. [22:41:31] Anyway, co-op also refers to the idea that something is "community operated", which is exactly what Wikipedia is all about. [22:41:53] I'll still let you know if a better name pops up though, but WP:CO-OP sounds like a good location for us :) [22:42:16] tos - Yeah. Some usurping of that name will need to happen, because it's taken, but Jake assures me it's doable. [22:42:56] Relatedly, we want to avoid being called the "coop," [22:43:17] as in the dwelling for raising chickens. : ) [22:43:31] Which is sometimes an alternative spelling for co-op. [22:44:01] Well it seems like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cooperatives already exists and is active [22:44:23] It could become confusing quick. [22:44:52] We'll figure it out. I think it's a solid name and I think we'll be able to work something out with the Cooperatives project. [22:45:44] Sure. [22:47:07] Anyway, there are two other things we should discuss before we finish up-- profiles and path mock-ups. Do you need a break before we start on those? [22:48:40] I'm good to go whenever you're ready [22:49:04] OK. I just need to something to drink; I'll be back shortly. [22:49:44] Ping me when you get back [22:55:11] tos - just realized I am quite hungry and am just heating up some food for myself. Be just a few minutes more. : ) [22:55:27] Alright no worries! [22:58:15] tos - OK, I'm back. [22:58:25] Alright then. [22:59:11] Actually, I had a meeting with Jake and Siko last week, and when we started, I said kind of the same thing. [22:59:44] As it turns out, both Siko and Jake were also very hungry, so the meeting started with all of us leaving immediately to go get food and then come back. : ) [23:00:30] Sounds like an ominous start to a meeting :P [23:01:10] Hah. Thankfully, we did more than just digest. [23:01:42] Anyway, let's back to skills stuff... [23:01:58] Yeah [23:03:40] One thing that Gabe, Aaron, and I are relates to how editors come into the Co-op and begin taking lessons, and how they progress through them. [23:03:51] are interested in related to* [23:03:59] argh [23:04:03] are interested in relates to* [23:04:35] Alright. [23:06:32] As an example, it'll be helpful for us to develop a few hypothetical paths that an editor might take given what we have so far. [23:07:11] ...and also using the "modes of entry" idea that we've discussed. [23:07:14] Might take = Progress through the lessons? [23:07:20] That's right. [23:07:29] Like the order in which they do it [23:08:28] Correct, but you might also consider how many lessons a learner might take at one time. [23:09:20] But I think the order is most important. [23:09:22] Right. I hadnt considered we were also considering taking multiple lessons at a time. [23:09:36] *I hadnt known [23:10:40] You're right, we haven't formally discussed it yet. [23:13:13] I don't have any immediate preference at this moment, but I think we can be open to that possibility in making these mock-ups for now. [23:13:30] Yes, that should be good enough, I suppose. [23:14:33] Let's say, just to keep things simple, an editor might be taking between 1-2 lessons at a given time. [23:15:17] Alright. So how do you suggest we proceed with this? [23:17:26] Right. I think we should create, say, three mock-ups that are differentiated based on what the learner wants to do. [23:18:16] Let's take one editor whose end goal is to write a new article (we'll call this the "New article" mock-up.) [23:19:00] Let's have another who wants to do anti-vandalism work ("Anti-vandal" mock-up) [23:19:18] The last message I saw was "Let's take one editor whose end goal is to write a new article (we'll call this the "New article" mock-up.)" [23:19:51] OK. [23:19:58] The only message you missed was: Let's have another who wants to do anti-vandalism work ("Anti-vandal" mock-up) [23:21:32] And we'll have one more, who has a little editing experience already, who wants to get involved with Dispute Resolution process ("DR" mock-up). [23:21:45] Whereas the other two are completely new editors. [23:22:26] Well how about we replace Anti-Vandal with someone who wants to learn it all? [23:22:51] Because that's pretty much the standard kind of mentee we get. Who wants lessons in a general order. [23:23:56] Really? You think there will be a lot of editors who want to do all the lessons? [23:25:15] I think there will be a fair number of editors who join wikipedia with no prior interests [23:25:43] So they'd just look for some sort of lesson plan. [23:30:20] Ah, I see. [23:30:29] OK. Then let's make that change. [23:31:34] So we'll have 1) A new editor with no specific interests, 2) A new editor who wants to write a new article, and 3) An semi-experienced editor who wants to help resolve disputes. [23:31:48] In terms of how to create these mock-ups... [23:34:45] I was at first thinking about making another spreadsheet, but I think creating a flowchart would be a better illustration. [23:37:32] Gabe also mentioned that we should also consider how learners find out about subsequent skills they take. Does the editor look at the prerequisites somewhere along the way? Does the Co-op suggest a lesson or some kind of path? Would mentors point them there? Some combination of these? [23:39:00] Hmmm. Sound like valid questions [23:40:08] So how do we work on the flowchart again? [23:41:02] Right, so that's the question I'm mulling over right now. Can you use Google Drive to create documents right now? [23:42:29] Doubt it. Let me check [23:43:30] As I suspected, no. [23:43:44] Hm, OK. [23:44:35] Do you have access to PowerPoint or OpenOffice equivalent? [23:45:38] Yes. [23:49:12] I_Jethrobot, ^ [23:50:43] tos - Actually, let me rethink this. I'm beginning to realize that a flowchart for each of these would be way too much work. [23:50:59] There actually can be a way to do this in Excel... [23:51:18] Let me set up a new tab on the List of skills. [23:56:24] I_Jethrobot, So how exactly do you suggest we complete this? [23:57:33] Right, so I've made that Tab labeled "Mock-ups" [23:59:46] Alright [23:59:59] I want you to take on the "unspecified goal" editor and think about a path that such an editor might take through the Co-op, hypothetically.