1. Purpose
This document outlines the steps required in Pond to ensure that issues progressing to Flightplan are viable, structured, and actionable. While Pond encourages open dialogue and idea generation, it is essential to establish a process for refining and validating issues before escalation.
2. Principles for Issue Refinement in Pond
- Open Discussion First – Users are free to explore all angles of an issue without immediate constraints.
- Community-Led Validation – Feasibility is determined through structured feedback, ensuring only viable proposals move forward.
- Pre-Flightplan Refinement Phase – Before escalation, issues must pass a basic feasibility check to prevent impractical solutions.
3. Steps Required Before an Issue Moves to Flightplan
Step 1: Initial Discussion & Community Engagement
- A topic is introduced in Pond, allowing users to discuss, debate, and refine the issue.
- Ideas, concerns, and alternative viewpoints are explored openly.
Step 2: Viability Check & Structured Feedback
- Users participate in a reality check discussion thread before escalation.
- A basic feasibility assessment is applied, asking:
- Is this solution physically, legally, and financially possible?
- Does it conflict with existing infrastructure or policies?
- Would implementation require external approval (e.g., government permits)?
- Users can upvote/downvote feasibility to help filter out unrealistic ideas.
Step 3: Community Moderation & Issue Structuring
- A structured refinement discussion is initiated to transition from open debate to a workable problem statement.
- A draft summary of the issue, key stakeholders, and potential solutions is created.
- Users can contribute to the preliminary funding and resource considerations (CapEx vs. OpEx, possible funding sources).
Step 4: Flightplan Readiness Review
- A final pre-escalation review ensures the issue is structured enough for Flightplan.
- Users or moderators confirm:
- A clear problem statement exists.
- Basic feasibility questions have been addressed.
- There is sufficient public interest to warrant further development.
4. Preventing “Boaty McBoatface” Scenarios
While Pond encourages creativity, we must prevent unrealistic, joke, or extreme proposals from reaching Flightplan. This is addressed through: Crowdsourced Filtering – Users can flag proposals that lack viability. Basic Feasibility Checks – Requires simple assessment before escalation. Pre-Flightplan Refinement – Ensures discussion moves from ideas to structured proposals. Moderation Safeguards – Admins can intervene in edge cases if needed.
5. Conclusion
This structured handoff process ensures that Flightplan receives well-formed, viable issues while keeping Pond an open and creative discussion space. By integrating community-driven validation, feasibility checks, and structured refinement, Canuckduck maintains a balance between inclusivity and practicality in issue escalation.