Difference between revisions of "Distributed Planning Game:Status"
Obed Suhail (talk | contribs) |
(→Status: {{NotYet}}: removing headings that don't make sense) |
||
|
(15 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
==Status: {{NotYet}} == | ==Status: {{NotYet}} == | ||
| − | * We have {{BelowThreshold| | + | * We have {{BelowThreshold|75%}} (6) YES of {{BelowThreshold|8}} [[AboutUsStaff|Staff]] |
| − | |||
<div style="background:#EEFFDF;"> | <div style="background:#EEFFDF;"> | ||
<big>{{NotYet}} ---------- {{NotYet}}</big> | <big>{{NotYet}} ---------- {{NotYet}}</big> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
<ol> | <ol> | ||
| − | {{DistributedPlanningGame| | + | {{DistributedPlanningGame|Julia}} |
| − | + | {{DistributedPlanningGame|TedErnst}}</ol> | |
| − | {{DistributedPlanningGame|TedErnst}} | ||
| − | |||
| − | </ol> | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
| − | |||
<big>{{YES}} ---------- {{YES}}</big> | <big>{{YES}} ---------- {{YES}}</big> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
<ol> | <ol> | ||
| + | {{DistributedPlanningGame|Asma Khan}} | ||
| + | {{DistributedPlanningGame|Ray King}} | ||
| + | {{DistributedPlanningGame|John Stanton}} | ||
| + | {{DistributedPlanningGame|Asad Butt}} | ||
| + | {{DistributedPlanningGame|Obed Suhail}} | ||
| + | {{DistributedPlanningGame|ChrisBabson}} | ||
</ol> | </ol> | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
<noinclude> | <noinclude> | ||
[[Category:ConsensusPoll]] | [[Category:ConsensusPoll]] | ||
</noinclude> | </noinclude> | ||
__NOTOC__ | __NOTOC__ | ||
Latest revision as of 18:54, 21 September 2007
[[ConsensusPoll:Distributed Planning Game|
To participate, enter your name as would like it to appear (after the slash).
|
|
Status: NotYet
- We have 75% (6) YES of 8 Staff
NotYet ---------- NotYet
- TedErnst (AboutUsStaff)
- NotYet I think the template for a new task needs to be much simpler, perhaps the way Dev is doing it? Also, I'm concerned that many staff have not seen this page and don't know that they can help improve this process.
edit
Discussion - NotYet I think the template for a new task needs to be much simpler, perhaps the way Dev is doing it? Also, I'm concerned that many staff have not seen this page and don't know that they can help improve this process.
YES ---------- YES
- John Stanton (AboutUsStaff)
- YES I think we have a workable structure now and this consensus poll can only make it better.. edit
Discussion - YES I think we have a workable structure now and this consensus poll can only make it better..
- Asad Butt (AboutUsStaff)
- YES I think the model is a good one to start with. Of course we will refine it as we use it more and more. edit
Discussion - YES I think the model is a good one to start with. Of course we will refine it as we use it more and more.
- ChrisBabson (AboutUsStaff)
- YES Still needs refining, but the general framework is good. edit
Discussion - YES Still needs refining, but the general framework is good.