i liked Karim’s framing of an “iterative, progressive approach” rather than a “big bang implementation.” Karim also seemed a little taken aback at the notion that Resonate would be competing with Spotify any time soon. @psi’s question and Karim’s answer made me think of the questions and comments that were coming up in the Which Way Forward meeting regarding Resonate’s comps. is it Spotify? or Bandcamp? or both? maybe it’s shifted over time… if not for everyone, for some people.
4 Likes
I think there’s potential in seeing the “roadmap” not just as one product, but as potentially a series of products that work in concert with each other. That way maybe we can stop thinking of Resonate in terms of existing products.
5 Likes
social session w/@honeyanhibiscus & @richjensen
good points raised about ‘serving the interests of professional independent artists’ as a matter of defining the minimum service to be provided… NOT as an exclusive qualifier.
Perhaps there has been some confusion around this.
‘Professional’ here means that the service should meet the business conditions that a typical independent musician or song-writer operates within for their current livelihood. It is not intended to define certain standards of ‘quality’ or ‘seriousness’ or specific ways of approaching the work. It is not intended to exclude any people or musical work they hold rights to.
The point is that the service should handle current international conventions around the typical intellectual property transactions relating to music, ie separate standard accounting protocols for sound recordings and the songs (compositions) they contain, with geographic specificity as needed and a reasonable standard of diligence that the user holds the creative rights in what they post.
More about these minimum service factors here: What does a Professional DSP (Digital Service Provider) Look Like?
We also discussed the value of ‘non-technical’ aspects of the coop, the social significance of the Dismantling White Culture at Resonate sessions, for example.
We shared some of our persynal journeys and interest in cooperative spaces and reflected on the various institutional legacies of coops, both as a legal construct that might be traced to Britain or other sources in the 19th Century and as a body of social conventions that have developed in societies across the planet since time immemorial. We also explored tensions between those social legacies and how they may be relevant to conversations we have experienced at Resonate.
3 Likes
Hi there!
I’m David, from the Justifay team. Just in case anyone has questions regarding our involvement or part in this, I will be hanging in this thread and I will try to join the calls, if you consider it valuable.
So, feel free to ask me, contact me or mention me in case you want to ask or discuss something regarding Justifay.
4 Likes
Notes from Justifay/Resonate Session Jan 23
@honeyanhibiscus @brndnkng and I joined today’s call with Karim and Justifay collaborators. Karim shared an update of his process and invited Justifay and Resonate reps to set work sessions for each of their teams the week of Jan 30 - Feb 5.
The purpose of these sessions will be to analyze and critique the user personas and assumptions of his work to date from the specific perspective of each collaborating organization (Resonate for Resonate and Justifay for Justifay).
The goal will be a refinement of the components in his documentation, first confirming that they identify the needs of each organization and then ranking them in terms of their priority for inclusion across initial versions of a Minimum Viable Product (MVP).
The object will be to identify and sort:
- What MUST be included in the first iteration of the MVP (version 0)
- What SHOULD be included in the first iteration of the MVP v.0
- What COULD be included in the first iteration of the MVP v.0.
Karim intends to help guide each team to apply this ranking across a series of versions extending into the future while also defining what components may be common to both collaborating organizations and which represent components which may be unique to one organization or the other.
More details from Jan 18 Product Check-in.
1 Like
lots of thoughts are coming up for me after attending the 1/17 meeting, watching the 1/18 meeting, and attending meetings yesterday. there are also threads / posts i started reading which i plan to return to… but even though me reading 1,000 or so posts pales in comparison to how much many of y’all who’ve been here for longer have read… i’m starting to experience the Resonate forum reading fatigue that a few people have mentioned recently. 
what possibility is there of pushing back the session to review Karim’s process… even just a little bit? the time frame of Jan 30 - Feb 5 is only 6 to 12 days out. i would have mentioned this yesterday but i didn’t think of it at the time, plus i was invited to join last minute and i wouldn’t have wanted to speak out of turn.
what plans are there to further discuss / identify nexts steps / follow through with implementing the different resolutions that passed after the AGM? i’m not necessarily suggesting folks wait until every single issue that came up during the AGM is decided on… or that every resolution that passed after the AGM is enacted… because that might take weeks / months. but i do think a little more breathing room seems like a good idea. there are matters such as who has the capacity to work and where / how Resonate operates that are unresolved. in my opinion, a little more collective clarity regarding those matters will likely lead to people being more present when making the decisions Karim is prompting.
3 Likes
i’m in agreement with pushing back Karim’s session for us to have our feet under us a bit more.
are there other questions along with those @honeyanhibiscus mentioned re: AGM resolutions progress, collective clarity on capacity, and how we operate) do we feel we need to have answered before we circle back again with Karim??
how should we go about doing this? would the worker-retrospective call work for this kind of convo? I kno folks are a bit exhausted with the weekly meetings. maybe we make them bi-weekly in this interim period?
i also kno Karim’s desire is to meet with at least 1 or 2 ppl (3ppl max) to walk thru the miro board and discuss. i’m wondering how we’d decide who’d be a part of that conversation and represent our collective interests. my persynal hope is that we have technical and non-technical people a part of this conversation.
when works well for us to have this convo? i also kno Karim is on contract right now and i’m unclear of quite how long we’ll have access to him considering his contract ends very soon. i wanted to share this b/c it’s also an important variable to consider w/ our planning.
2 Likes
Room is open. Reflecting on questions @brndnkng posed above.
Reflecting on the Player’s current status without active Maintainers.
@DavidHernandez @honeyanhibiscus joined the call at about :15.
Discussion concerned persynal experiences or observations of community forks and GPL licensing of code.
Observations were offered about some of the operational questions and resourcing issues Resonate is facing more or less in synch with the @directors elections scheduled for the end of February.
Permission was granted for an audio recording with the intention of generating more complete notes.
I’m checking in after a family retreat in Portland Oregon (US).
Karim is scheduled to meet with representatives from Resonate (@brndnkng @remst8 @replygirl) today to help set priorities for components of a Digital Streaming Service (DSP) Minimal Viable Product (MVP). (At the last minute @piper was not able to attend.)
I’m hoping to see, or share, any updates from the session in this channel no later than 2023-02-27T08:00:00Z.
Room is open.
V2 Product Trajectory DSP V2.pdf (1.3 MB)
This is the current draft of the Digital Streaming Platform (DSP) Minimal Viable Product (MVP) development plan prepared by Karim, the Product Manager hired late last year by the Jusitfay/Resonate collaborative. (Though Resonate members participated in his selection, his position is funded solely by Justifay at this time.)
These preliminary documents, the beginnings of an outline for development of a DSP, have been drated in an open collaboration between Justifay and Resonate members over the last 6 months.
The purpose of this document is to provide a general frame for project planning by members of the collaborative. The operational requirements and priorities outlined here are intended to guide the preparation of a more detailed projection breaking out each bullet point into specific development tasks and dependencies, each with a simple “T-shirt size” metric (S, M, L, XL) to estimate their difficulty or complexity. This next more detailed projection should give the collaborative partners a reasonable basis for anticipating and gathering the resources required to implement the DSP service (Time, Skills, Finance, etc.).
When this draft (V2) is stable, a more detailed scoping plan can begin. (Anticipated in 6 - 8 weeks.)
Your feedback and participation is welcome!
I raised this question at last week’s session with Justifay (@replygirl also attended).
Karim’s answer was that his role and commitment to the process is secure. While the role was originally tasked with delivery of an implementation plan by Jan 31, his part-time schedule, depth of engagement and sufficient resourcing from Justifay have provided for a more open-ended approach built around monthly deliverables and reviews (such as the Product Trajectory shared above).
Brief update from last week’s session with Justifay attended by @richjensen and @honeyanhibiscus.
Karim was traveling. @DavidHernandez shared an overview of his contributions adding the next layer of detail, specific development tasks, to the Project Trajectory document. @honeyanhibiscus spoke to the need for interested people to be able to easily access and contribute to a coherent plan of action.
Closing sync meeting at :21 past the hour. Please reach out with any questions. 
Quick update on what’s the current thing being worked on. As @richjensen has said, we are working on splitting the epics and user stories into actionable technical tasks with two goals:
- Being able to “estimate” the required time effort to complete de MVP.
- Being able to have a quick view of what is already done and what is left to be done.
We are working on the next Miro board: Miro | Online Whiteboard for Visual Collaboration
The board is open so anyone can see the progress and can comment in case is considered appropriate.
I would like to invite anyone with the technical knowledge to do it, to contribute to this work. If anyone want to help, contact me and we can organize a call to discuss the approach and also to invite it to the board, to have edit permissions.
2 Likes
About the miro board, it looks empty until you click on the sidebar button on the bottom left corner.
1 Like
@remst8 and I attended the collaborative session with Justifay March 27. Very brief. This phase of the work in Miro continues. @DavidHernandez is taking a couple of weeks off from the project. Next collab session will occur April 17.
Peace to all the Resonators,
Come through for updates about recent progress with the Justifay collaboration.
Link and local times are listed at the top of the thread.
Looking forward to checking in and catching up with YOU.
The most recent collaborative session occurred last Monday, May 8.
Karim, David and the Justifay team are continuing to make progress drafting a detailed task list for developing a first version of a DSP (Digital Service Provider) to meet the professional needs of active independent artists.
They look forward to sharing their draft for community review very soon. The next collaborative meeting is scheduled for 2023-05-24T07:00:00Z.
Resonate’s present services offer an unsupported demonstration model but do not yet meet professional artists needs or offer a clear path toward meeting those needs.
A detailed task list and outlines of a long term roadmap should give Resonate and Justifay members communities a realistic sense of the resources required, including sustained software development time, that will be required to build an initial version of the service.
