Better collaboration
Shared collections for a problem
33 supporters860 influence
10 comments · 10 people in the discussion
- Idea→
- Discussing→
- Gaining support→
- Proposal→
- Voting→
- Approved→
- Building→
- In experiment→
- Shipped→
- Measured
Problem
Related ideas scatter. A team that cares about the same problem has no shared place to gather evidence before a proposal exists.
Why it matters
The hive is good at voting and weak at thinking together beforehand. Collections would make the early stage feel like work, not a pile.
Potential solutions
A collection: several ideas, one problem statement, shared evidence, still one influence pool per idea.
Proposal #21
Shared collections for a problem
- Problem
- Related ideas scatter. A team that cares about the same problem has no shared place to gather evidence before a proposal exists.
- Evidence
- The collaboration theme is carrying the most influence, spread across ideas that members themselves call duplicates.
- Proposed change
- Let members gather ideas into a collection without merging away the original authors.
- Expected impact
- Proposals arrive with evidence already attached, and fewer near-duplicate votes.
- Alternatives
- Staff-only merges. Faster, and it teaches people their words can vanish.
- Risks
- Collections can become folders nobody opens. Cap them and show them on the idea.
- Open questions
- Does influence on a child idea count toward the collection?
- Complexity
- large
- Success metrics
- Time from first evidence comment to a proposal drops for collected problems.
The draft is open for discussion before a vote begins.
A product specification exists for what comes after the decision. It is a brief, not code.
Hive Intelligence · community synthesis
Synthesis
Drawn from the discussion. Not a decision.
Related ideas scatter. A team that cares about the same problem has no shared place to gather evidence before a proposal exists.
Evidence
- The part I would spend influence on is specific: evidence lived in five threads and never quite became one proposal.
- I don't want another feature. I want fewer people stuck with evidence lived in five threads and never quite became one proposal.
- I keep running into this around evidence lived in five threads and never quite became one proposal. “Shared collections for a problem” is the name I would have used.
Community sentiment
- Demand is specific. Supporters keep returning to the same broken moment, not a vague wish list.
- The objection is about scope. Concerns are less “never do this” and more “don’t do it in a way that drowns the problem.”
- People brought proof. Evidence comments describe real sessions, not hypothetical users.
Arguments for
- Merging should be a last resort. A collection lets both framings stay visible.
- Before we build “Shared collections for a problem”, write the success metric in the proposal itself.
- A smaller version of “Shared collections for a problem” could tell us if we even framed the problem correctly.
Arguments against
- If influence splits across a collection, a real problem can look weaker than it is.
Alternatives
- Start with a manual link between two ideas. A full collection can wait if that already helps.
Open questions
- Who can add an idea to a collection — the author, or anyone?
Treat “Shared collections for a problem” as a problem statement: Related ideas scatter. The leading suggestion is: A collection: several ideas, one problem statement, shared evidence, still one influence pool per idea. Why it matters here: The hive is good at voting and weak at thinking together beforehand.
Community discussion
Merging should be a last resort. A collection lets both framings stay visible.
If influence splits across a collection, a real problem can look weaker than it is.
Who can add an idea to a collection — the author, or anyone?
Start with a manual link between two ideas. A full collection can wait if that already helps.
Before we build “Shared collections for a problem”, write the success metric in the proposal itself.
The part I would spend influence on is specific: evidence lived in five threads and never quite became one proposal.
A smaller version of “Shared collections for a problem” could tell us if we even framed the problem correctly.
I don't want another feature. I want fewer people stuck with evidence lived in five threads and never quite became one proposal.
Whatever we do with “Shared collections for a problem”, the decision has to stay attached to this thread.
I keep running into this around evidence lived in five threads and never quite became one proposal. “Shared collections for a problem” is the name I would have used.
Join the hive to add to this thread.