Thanks for the in-depth response Seth. Here are my main takeaways:
- The proposed system can work for now, but have holes in terms of Cred allocation.
- Writing technical docs can be done without technical background, but involves speaking with SME.
- Allocating Cred int he docs process needs to be fine-tuned (or really, plain old tuned).
I definitely agree that Cred allocation for docs needs some agreed-upon tactics. This could involve the platform we use to propose, approve, write, edit and review docs, but that involves finding a platform that works as a task-ticker, that supports writing/editing docs and tracks progress, and also supports discussion about docs, such as a voting system to see how important each proposal is to the community. I’ve looked into this and found that there were no perfect solutions, so my thought is that waiting for the Creditor may be the way to go.
As for technical documents being written by people who don’t understand the tech, I don’t entirely agree with that, as someone who has tried. I found that I created more work for SMEs by having multiple questions, and then follow-up questions, that couldn’t all be answered in one sitting, such as a meeting about the doc. One example is How to Set Up SourceCred. On the other hand, I was able to write the How to Convert Grain doc with the expertise of @panchomiguel. However, I was already somewhat well-versed in cryptocurrency for a non-dev, and already had a coinbase account. To conclude, I think tech doc proposals would need to be tagged with strongly recommended background knowledge/skills for those who’d like to try to author them.