Other
The hive shouldn't only think in English
27 supporters380 influence
10 comments · 10 people in the discussion
- Idea→
- Discussing→
- Gaining support→
- Proposal→
- Voting→
- Approved→
- Building→
- In experiment→
- Shipped→
- Measured
Problem
Ideas, votes, and transcripts assume English. Members who think in another language either stay quiet or write a thinner version of what they mean.
Why it matters
A collective that only hears one language will think it has consensus when it has a filter.
Potential solutions
Let a member write in their language and read others in theirs, with the original always one tap away.
Proposal #29
The hive shouldn't only think in English
- Problem
- Ideas, votes, and transcripts assume English. Members who think in another language either stay quiet or write a thinner version of what they mean.
- Evidence
- Members said they draft in another language, then delete half of it before posting English.
- Proposed change
- Accept the original language and show a translation beside it. The original is the record.
- Expected impact
- Objections and evidence arrive in the words the member actually has.
- Alternatives
- Translate the interface only. That helps navigation and not the argument.
- Risks
- A bad translation can swing a vote. Keep the original visible inside the decision room, not buried.
- Open questions
- Which languages do we owe accuracy to first?
- Complexity
- large
- Success metrics
- Members who currently post in a second language post longer evidence comments.
The draft is open for discussion before a vote begins.
Hive Intelligence · community synthesis
Synthesis
Drawn from the discussion. Not a decision.
Ideas, votes, and transcripts assume English. Members who think in another language either stay quiet or write a thinner version of what they mean.
Evidence
- I write the real objection in Spanish, then post the polite English summary. The summary is always weaker.
- The part I would spend influence on is specific: non-English members were posting shorter, safer versions of the point.
- I don't want another feature. I want fewer people stuck with non-English members were posting shorter, safer versions of the point.
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
- If the original isn't in the room, the translation becomes the decision. That's how meanings get voted away.
- Before we build “The hive shouldn't only think in English”, write the success metric in the proposal itself.
- A smaller version of “The hive shouldn't only think in English” could tell us if we even framed the problem correctly.
Arguments against
- Machine translation will be confidently wrong on exactly the sentences that matter.
Alternatives
- No alternative has been spelled out. The author’s suggestion is the only concrete path on the table.
Open questions
- Do moderators need to read the original, or is the translation enough to moderate?
Treat “The hive shouldn't only think in English” as a problem statement: Ideas, votes, and transcripts assume English. The leading suggestion is: Let a member write in their language and read others in theirs, with the original always one tap away. Why it matters here: A collective that only hears one language will think it has consensus when it has a filter.
Community discussion
I write the real objection in Spanish, then post the polite English summary. The summary is always weaker.
If the original isn't in the room, the translation becomes the decision. That's how meanings get voted away.
Machine translation will be confidently wrong on exactly the sentences that matter.
Do moderators need to read the original, or is the translation enough to moderate?
Before we build “The hive shouldn't only think in English”, write the success metric in the proposal itself.
The part I would spend influence on is specific: non-English members were posting shorter, safer versions of the point.
A smaller version of “The hive shouldn't only think in English” could tell us if we even framed the problem correctly.
I don't want another feature. I want fewer people stuck with non-English members were posting shorter, safer versions of the point.
Whatever we do with “The hive shouldn't only think in English”, the decision has to stay attached to this thread.
I keep running into this around non-English members were posting shorter, safer versions of the point. “The hive shouldn't only think in English” is the name I would have used.
Join the hive to add to this thread.