Governor Samuel Lallon of Plateau State on Friday just tasked the Catholic Women Organization, CWO of Nigeria, to pray for Nigerian leaders and for those still in kidnappers' captivity. Governor Lallon noted the special attribute of women as being fervent in prayers and intercessors for their families, churches and country at large, urging them to pray for national peace. Earlier, the CWO board of trustees secretary, Mrs. Florence Agar, said the visit was to appreciate the governor for his kind gesture to the association and other groups in the state. She loaded the governor for being detribalized and for being committed to the progress of the Catholic Church and the state. She said the visit was also to introduce the new president of CWO in Nigeria, Mrs. Mary Gonson, to the governor. As it takes over the affairs of the association.


We're back on again Thursday, I'm Jay Fidel, this is Think Tech Community Matters, and Peter Adler joins us today. He was the convener at the Morning Media Symposium last Thursday. Welcome, Peter. You did a great job last week. Always good fun. We really appreciate that. Always good fun. Always fun to be with you. Let's review and have a retrospective. You know, who was there, for example? Well, I think we want to highlight some of the media people. There was Hawaii Public Radio was there, Civil Beat was there, KHON was there. We had independent bloggers like Ian Lind. It was a real interesting dialogue. Steve Petranic, obviously, from Hawaii Business, who was one of our panel leaders. Yeah. Oh, yeah. It was really replete with media from around the town. It's interesting to juxtaposition because this is local media, but we live in a world of firestorm of media, of national media with your friend Donald Trump. I say he's your friend because I know he's not my friend. So the question, really, is how do you relate those two things? How can, as convener, how can you have a conversation about local media and not really deal with the national, the troubles, the challenges, oh gosh, the malevolent things that happen vis-à-vis the national media? Well, you know, the point is that the world is on fire right now. And I would like to argue that Hawaii is smoldering. We are on fire, too. It's a slower burn. We're not quite as outrageous and crazy as what we see every day on the national news. I mean, our president is just kind of loose.  Yes. So, and then we have, you know, lots of foreign actions, and we have domestic actions and the impeachment. So there's that whole world of stuff, and you could, some would say it's always on fire. It's always on fire. But today it's acute. We have an acute burn going on, but we also have our local smoldering problems here that I think are coming up. The flames are rising. So you mentioned you had some insights as a result of part of this conversation last Thursday. Can you give us some of those insights? Insights, you're doing me honor with that word, insights. I took a lot of notes, even though I opened and closed the session, it was really led by yourself and Steve Petraniak, who led very good panels. But there were things I heard that rang my bell, and I'll just run through a couple of them, and we end there more later on. We talked a lot about kind of the essence of good journalism, which is voice, solutions, truth, and above all, stories, good stories that compel people. Either longer, if you prefer longer, shorter, whatever form you prefer it in. And Brett Oprigard said, for example, the value of great stories in the public space is that they get people talking. They get people buzzing around a bit, and they identify problems, they work with solutions, they work different voices. So it was a good reminder just to start out with the say, stories, we're all about stories. And then you get into the question of truth stories, and false stories, and fake news, and real news. But it's a good reminder that that's what journalists do, is they dig for stories, or they tell a story, and they hope to create a buzz. That's why it's called stories. That's what it is. And we know actually that humans, we communicate best through stories. So, it's okay in some. We know that's where we started around campfires, with stories. Yeah. What did you do today, Jay? What did you do, you know, pull off? And what did you do today, Og? And we, oh, I saw this really interesting thing across the river.  That's our roots. We're still part of it. I was reading my theory before the show began about the species. The species is a social animal, we're a social animal. And that means we talk to each other, we collaborate in order to bring the big bear down, or we don't in order to have a big fight or war, or what have you. But we deal together. At the end of the day, you can't be alone in the Northwoods. That doesn't work. That's clear, that's no more a viable option for anybody. So the question is, you know, what, so the quality of this conversation, the quality of this communication of social animals socializing with each other, around the campfire or otherwise. What effect does that have on our, what do you call it, political structure, on our structure as a large conglomeration of people in this country, 350 million, whatever it is, and in other places, and on the world stage as well? If it's good, what happens? If it's bad, what happens? What does it mean to our form of government, our democracy? What does it mean to our quality of life? Got an answer on that? Well, I don't think I have an answer, but I think I would share a few thoughts, certainly. I've never been shy about doing that with you, Jay. So I think just as the world is going through massive disruptions and changes in the order of things, so is journalism. Journalism is fragmented. I was saying before we started, they used to call it the fourth estate. Now it's a bunch of little bungalows and condos and hovels over here and gated communities over there. It's not an estate. It's no longer an estate in the traditional way that it might have been in the 1950s. So we got a very disrupted world of journalism. And the question, one of the questions that came out was, what's the key to sustainability? How, who's gonna survive? We'll think tech survive. We'll, KHONTV do it. And there were a few clues in there. There were a few clues that I heard. And again, I'm a writer, but I'm not necessarily a journalist. And one of the clues was from Bill Dorman. He said, really zeroing in on your audience and doing the analytics and figuring out who you're telling those stories to. Who do you want to have listened or hear? That was a very important moment for me because Dorman was reminding us that in this sprawl of new journalism, you gotta figure out who you wanna talk to or who you want to have read or who you wanna have write. And you gotta get some analytics around that. Aggression for a moment? Absolutely. Brad Parsqual, remember the name, we'll hear more about him. He was the tech political guy for Trump in the 2016 election. He is now the overall campaign manager. He's probably 30, maybe less. He's brilliant, American, from an American school, I wanna say in the South or the Midwest. This is not Harvard and Yale, and he is a genius. This guy understands about connecting with your audience. He understands about dealing with Cambridge Analytica, which is what he did back in 2016. He understands about examining the audience and messaging to the audience. And a micro level too. Micro level, and it's more of an art form now than it was in 2016. There was an article in The Times a couple of days ago about how Trump was way ahead of the Democrats in terms of understanding how you reach subsets. What are they into subsets? Trump has issued 45 million tweets or something like that since he took office, and he's hitting huge numbers of people. I mean, huge numbers of people. He's spending enormous amounts of money. And he's got lots of money, and he's raising more money. That's what he does. And he figures that the way it works now is social media. The way you win votes in elections, social media. And the article stood for the proposition that he will win because he understands social media. So in a sense, our conventional media program last Thursday was conventional. We don't understand Brad Pusquale or the leverage that he has, and will continue to have and improve on. But Opragar, Brett from the university said something key at the beginning. And you were moderating that panel. He said technology is the driver. And that's a great example. Pusquale's a great example of it. So he's figured out a technology and an analytic process of using that technology. And that is building the strategy that they have for moving their stories around. True or false stories. Doesn't matter. They, the technology is the driver. That was Brett's point. Yeah, it's almost as if the true of, you heard it here, it's almost as if the true and false and he doesn't really matter. It's how people react to that. Whether you're reaching Bill Dorman's audience subset and having effect on their opinion and therefore on public opinion in general. One of the things I liked about our session was Steve Petranic brought from Hawaii Business. He brought in some data. He brought some data to the tables. We were all conjecturing on opinions and ideas and blah, blah, blah, blah. And he said, his numbers, and I don't remember, I don't have the numbers. He said they know that video reaches the most people now. But it's also more expensive and it produces fewer stories compared to written products that produce, they're cheaper in some ways and produce more stories.  That's the sort of demographic. Older people are watching tube. They're sitting in a couch somewhere. The younger people are reading. And why, I mean, it's not yet completely known but why one reason is that you can read faster. You don't have to wait for the agenda of the television show. You can read right now. You can see the point. You can get it from the headline first paragraph or the next one. And if you have a lot of stuff being thrown at you, you can absorb more or absorb may not be the right word. You can have some contact with more news, be aware of more stories and therefore enjoy your conversation with your peers who love to hear that you are well informed or not because you know the in-depth story but because you know the headlines. One of the interesting side impacts of that, I hang out with people who are writers. They write books and like me it's a writing as a hobby. It's not like I'm making my living doing it although I did a little freelance work earlier. But one of the things is that there's less and less of a tendency to read longer form writing, right? So you can write a brilliant essay and it's 30 pages. Who's gonna read it? Nobody. They'll read the executive summary. They'll read the first couple of paragraphs. You better summarize things and those few who wanna dig deeper can read the written. But there's a shrinking of attention that's going on. And the other thing that's happening is we now live in an attention society where big money is betting that they can capture your attention for eight to 10 seconds on something. They are. Yeah. Yeah, it works. I think you make a real study of that. Young people, old people, all kinds of different subsets and they have different attention spans. I know watching the show, you know that our average is like nine minutes. After that they're off. And I think actually, Peter, we're beyond the nine minutes. Where? So they probably left already. The posse. Let's take a break. Peter Adler, a chord 3.0. Hi, I'm Rusty Kamori, host of Beyond the Lines. I was the head coach for the Punahou Boys Varsity Tennis team for 22 years and we're fortunate to win 22 consecutive state championships. This show is based on my book, which is also titled Beyond the Lines and it's about leadership, creating a superior culture of excellence, achieving and sustaining success and finding greatness. If you're a student, parent, sports or business person and want to improve your life and the lives of people around you, tune in and join me on Mondays at 11 a.m. as we go Beyond the Lines on Think Kauai. Aloha. Aloha, I'm Keisha King, host of At the Crossroads, where we have conversations that are real and relevant. We have spoken with community leaders from right here locally in Hawaii and all around the world. Won't you join us on thinktecawai.com or on YouTube on the Think Tech Hawaii channel.  I'll see you at the Crossroads. Aloha. Yeah, good. Okay, we're back, Peter and me. So we're gonna talk about sacred cows because Ian Lynn was really spellbinding. He talked about sacred cows. What does that mean? In the local press, and I suppose in all of the press nationally, there are some topics people don't wanna write about or talk about or cover. And we go like that. Yeah, you go like that. Yeah, go like that. So anyway, can you remember some of the sacred cows? Yes, I do. And Ian's point was in the context of investigative journalism because that's what he's done for much of his career, his multiple careers. He's been an investigative journalist. And he still does that. He likes to dig on a story, go down to the Bureau of Conviances, gather everything up and figure out what's going on with this action. So one of the things he said was, and I think it was in response to the demise of investigative journalism in the mainstream media, that there's very little of it. And the reason for it is people can't afford it.  But for the most part, you know, the Star Advertiser and other papers like that. They read it off a prompter. Yeah, or they're taking people's press releases and they never know if somebody will follow a trail. Yeah. But he talked about, he said, if you really want to do investigative work, whether it's in the new media or in the old media, what you really need to do is figure out the sacred cows. What is it that nobody is talking about or people are a little afraid to talk about it? And he cited some very specific examples. He said, for example, in Hawaii, how come nobody's really dug down into the finances of the Hawaiian organizations? Now, sensitive, difficult. Nobody wants to attack Hawaiians and be thought of as anti-Hawaiian. But he said, lots of money in the Ali'i Trusts, lots of money at OHA, civic clubs, and you know, there's just the organizations that have wealth. They're sitting on resources. And that becomes especially important if we want to talk about the dominion and domain of a future sovereign region. Where's the dole gonna come from? So he said, that's an example of a sacred cow, that people go a little sensitive. We don't want to offend anybody. We live in an island where- Don't make a. Yeah, exactly. Go along, get along, all that stuff. He said a second one was the real estate world, which hasn't really been explored and possibly exposed. And there's interesting changes going on in the real estate world, but it's a big operation here in Hawaii. So you know, it's a big sector. He said, that's worth exploring and digging around on if somebody was enterprising. He talked about organized labor. Now there's an interesting one, right? Because we know Hawaii's very labor, pro-labor or very labor oriented. Our legislators tend to be approved of by labor or disapproved of by labor either in their elections or during their sessions. He said, how come we've not read any good stories? How come we haven't, nobody's followed the trail of the influence of organized labor? And that's just, that doesn't say it's all bad. There's a story, how come we're not looking at it? And then the last one he mentioned was airports. He said, our airport is kind of Junkalanka, right? And you know, it's kind of- We're all the time in my opinion. Yeah, it looks pretty bad. So he says, how come nobody's really dug on that story? So he was saying these are sacred cows that, and there are others that you could probably get. That's the key to investigation. Yeah, no, I totally agree. And that was so provocative when he was talking. He was really one of the best speakers in the crowd. So what I get is that somebody else talked about this.  And you know, you only hear about accidents and weather and sports and- Obituaries. And then again, on TV.  This is a place loaded with stories. I remember when the descendants came out, the movie and George Clooney, you know, played the movie. Everybody said, gee, that's our story. We know that story. How come Hollywood is coming and taking our story? Fact is, there's a thousand, thousand stories like the descendants, which we have not exploited. We have not revealed. And there's a thousand, thousand stories we could include in our media, which we don't. Sacred cows are otherwise. And that may be one of the future strands, you know, in this diminished fourth estate, but the rise of all the bungalows and condos and little hovels and hostels and whatever. One of those niches, I think, if I'm gleaning this right from all the conversation, may be very localized news. Very localized news. People want to know what's going on in their neighborhood. They want to know about that burglary that took place or that Pete Binkham was crawling around the neighborhood. They want to know about the speed bumps and the potholes. And then, you know, it may be that people, there's a real market. That's, again, where Dorman's comment about the analytics of who's your audience, I think, becomes important to the future of viability of different kinds of tourism. You know, something called Nextdoor. I think it's called Nextdoor. And about a month ago, they wanted me to sign up, so I signed up on the net. And now I get mail. I don't know how many times a day about every little thing, about lost dogs in your own hood. In my own hood, my next block. And it's very local. It's very newsy. It's very helpful. And who's producing that? Who produces them? Where does that come? It's a national. It's a national that comes local. And it's very interesting how this works, because it's what you're talking about. It's news, but it's local news, and it's refined down to my neighborhood. It's not the next neighborhood. It's only my neighborhood. So you say, well, maybe this is the future. Maybe it's the future of those bungalows and cottages. And maybe those bungalows and cottages are not old-time newsmen who have been around since Jimmy Cagney. You're dating yourself and me, but. Can't and whatnot. The new people who are going to do next door and do that refined thing that Bill Dorman talked about, they're younger. And they are interested in the stories. The problem that I have, though, and I'd like you to have thought about this, is the problem is that at the end of the day, we have to educate people who stopped their education at college or high school, most people. And they said, I don't like school anymore. And I'm going to sort of learn as I go. And I'll talk to my friends if they do. And I'll learn that way. And then they wind up learning at 6 o'clock and 10 o'clock. That's when they learn for eight minutes or something on television. Not enough. You can't be a worthy, responsible, accountable citizen doing that. You have got to be educated to cast a ballot. So my training is in sociology. So my instinct is to say to that person who's only watching at 6 or 9 or 10 or whatever it is, is not to say you've got to learn about everything else. It's to say, what do you want to learn about? What's the curiosity? What is it that interests you? Is it our local politics at the state level? Is it your island? Is it your neighborhood? Is it the national scene? I want to know what they want. That's what they're thinking about. I had a conversation with the advisory council of KGMP, Hawaii News Now in time. They said, and I said, why don't you show people what they need to know that's different? They need to know about what's happening in legislature, city council, government in general, the fiscal policy, all that. And Rick Blangiardy said, no, no, no. We know what they want. Accidents, crime, weather, and sports. And that's what we give them. And a lot of fluff stories about the kids on the weekends having an event or something. And my problem with that is that that does not make responsible citizens and serious players in a democratic society. And so I take your point and I change it to say, we have to tell them what they need to know. They may not be able to determine what they need to know. They have responsibilities. And the responsibilities don't stop at fluff stories, no? I agree. I mean, I agree there's a certain amount. But I think this is such a time of ferment. It would be interesting to understand what people want. What do they want? What do they want from ThinkTech, from our shows? What do they want from Star Advertiser? What do they want from Civil Beat? And the feedback channels need to be open within the range of what people can do. I mean, the media can't do everything. It can do some things. But I think we need a little more feedback, genuine, good feedback about it. Yes, I agree with that. Yeah, but I'm not disagreeing. We need to find ways. I mean, I've always thought we should give the DOE we should require citizenship tests for high school graduation. What's the same citizenship test that we asked? What a great idea. And they got to take it. How come this kid doesn't have to take it? How come my kids didn't have to take it? You want to vote, at least know something. Damn right, there's three branches of government. Here's the president. He's got two terms. I mean, there's some fundamentals. And of course, we know people have lost that. They don't know that. There's not much civics going on. Let's go to the last and most important point of our discussion. How is the press, which is under such stress, economic stress, political stress from guys like Trump, the stress of people not wanting that caring, not reading, not consuming news. Those are all big stresses on a media that has developed under the First Amendment since the Constitution. And now it's under attack in so many ways. How can it be sustainable? And the primary issue there is economic. How does it stay in business? How do they keep doing what it thinks it should do? And one of the things we didn't get to, because we only had a couple hours to do this with what it was, at 40 people in the room or so, one of the things we didn't talk about was the antidote to the fake news battles. And we didn't get a chance to talk about it. And I think it's actually worthy of another conversation, just on that. And there may be some antidotes to that, some things that can be done either regulatorally or voluntarily by through the pledges of companies and media outlets. So it's a big one.  None of it. I don't trust. Can I say bullshit? Can I say that? I talk to here in this neighborhood. I don't trust the press at all. I don't trust any media. I don't know what to trust and who to trust. So there's people who are looking for some kind of a compass or a navigational tool that can help them with that. And I don't think it's fully evolved at all. But that's worthy of another big conversation. Well, they say a couple of people with smart ideas can change the world. And maybe that'll happen. Maybe somebody will have a smart idea. It will be high tech, like Glenn Schiarty was also talking about technology as the future of news. And I certainly agree. And it can be the kind of technology that Zuckerberg does, which is often destructive. And it can be the kind of technology you're talking about, which is productive and constructive. So the question I put to you, though, is economically, how can they make a living? You can't sell newspapers on the street corner anymore. It's hard to get people to subscribe for $10 a month. It's hard to do that. It's being done by the newspapers, some of them anyway. It's hard to be in print. It's just hard to be in print. It's so expensive to print it and distribute it and all that. It's hard to have investigative reporters. How are we going to thread the needle on this? And there were a few comments towards that about sustainability of different media. And they talked about the civil beat model, which is a nonprofit, please give us donation. They also have a patron. They have a big daddy in Pierre Omidyar. But he doesn't pay for everything. And they are building. And so they have a nonprofit model, please give us $5 or $1 a day or whatever their pitch is. We talked about the midweeks and the star advertisers and how they have to really rely on ads and advertising. So I think there's a time for a reinvention. And it is a tough question, because unless you know who your audience is, as Dorman said, and unless you know you have some analytics on that stuff, how do you find the support channel? And we got to do it. We got to do it here at Think Tech. We got to do it everywhere. Anybody who wants to survive? Yeah, and we have a nation. We have to clean this up. This right now, it's not working. It's like in the movie The Terminator, when he comes up and he says, you want to live? Come with me. So how are they going to live? Pretty impressive. Yeah, yeah. And we don't know. No, we don't know. And concerns me of what you were talking about before. I'd like to latch on that for a minute. If you have a problem of this magnitude, a problem with the media of this magnitude, one possibility is to get the government to regulate how it's doing. And that is a very suggestive, if not seductive possibility in Congress. They're having hearings already. And they want to talk to, they want to reform Facebook, and this and that, and enlarge the unquestions of news. And monopoly questions. I think there's been monopoly questions. And monopoly around news, right? And consolidation of hundreds of radio stations. And they all happen to be just right of center, or very right of center. So it's a problem when you say, well, the only people who can solve this problem is the government. I don't think the founding fathers were thinking of that. They did not want the government involved in the press. One of the themes I heard from our friends and colleagues in that session was people are going to have to get used to the idea of paying for news and paying for stories. The notion that it's all freebies, that's coming to an end. One way or another, people have to pay. You have to subscribe. You have to donate. You have to do this. You have to do that. Otherwise, those channels go away. And I heard that pretty strongly from several people. I also heard Mahelani Richardson talk about the evolution of press that has multiple platforms. They are on the net. They are on TV. They are on the radio. They're on podcasts. There's multiple things. And I think the bigger ones are going to do that. Sure. And if you have multiple things going on, you can pick and choose which one is making more money for you, which has the greatest leverage, the greatest reach, and go that way, like a pseudopod and an amoeba. You find your path and you drop off the ones that don't work. And I think it's very important. And I point to two possibilities for your consideration, Peter, which we did not get to discuss on last Thursday. One is books. So I watch Rachel Maddow. I like Rachel Maddow. She's written two books in the last six months or less. Good books. And it's about things that are happening right now, things that are relevant to understanding the world around us. And then you start looking at all those guys from the New York Times and Washington Post. They're all writing books. Go to Kendall. You can download them in a one minute flat. And this is news. The question is who's reading them? How much reading goes on? Good question. That's my question. Because if you're writing longer form writing, whether it's nonfiction or fiction, the question is, are there readers? Are there readers? And I don't know. Maybe it's enough that Rachel Maddow has a good name or Susan Rice or others. And people will just buy it for the name. And I don't know. It's a really good question. And maybe they should be short books. Could be the answer. We'd like to get them right here on this show. Susan Rice, for example, Rachel Maddow. One other thing that pops up along the same lines is Frontline. I think Frontline is an example of what you can do in a fairly compressed period of time with a news story that requires some drill down. And they have done a number. And they've sustained. Sustainable. As has Meet the Press, the one of the oldest shows on the networks. Somehow they managed to figure out a survival strategy. And I don't know what the key is. Who knows what the secret sauce is? No, but we have to keep watching. We've got to find it. And we have to keep following it. And you have to keep on organizing these programs. You were the real organizer. I was popped up for ceremonial purposes. That was great. That was great. So Peter, what's your closing remark? I mean, there's camera one over there. They want to know what you want to leave with them. This is your big opportunity. And you may select a one-word description of what you have in mind. You like that. Stories. Go for stories. I think stories are the essence. Stories make the world, and the world is made of stories. It's not made of molecules. It's not made of laws and regulations. It's made of stories. And let's focus on the stories, pay attention to the stories, listen to the stories, read stories, and write stories. And there are so, so many stories. There are. Let's get the good ones. It's great to be alive these days, I think. I agree. Thank you, Peter Radler. Thank you, Dave. Great to talk to you. Always, always, always. Yeah, good fun.


So we're talking about sub-epics. So I think Annabelle you responded to at least one of their shoes I didn't look at anything for my this morning yet. So any other things you wanted to start off with before I blabber away? No, I know you talked about possibly having some designs ready and thinking about sub-epics But I don't have designs and the comment I did post was more about how we're structuring this and whether we want To do it the way that we currently haven't set up. So sure you can if you want to go ahead and talk, okay? Yeah, so I'll just motivate the problem a bit and Then and then go from there. So let me Pull up some things Right, okay, so Okay, so this is the Romap we have as opposed to in Slack yesterday Let me just a little bit smaller so maybe easier To see and so we have a we have a lot of things we want to do with portfolio management and the two big areas that in talking with customers and in In what they want Which is really interesting is sort of like it's something that I don't think we ourselves are using a lot or would use is being able to Breakdown work to to Sub sub whatever so so it's called work breakdown structure at least in some areas, right? So you're breaking down the work into a subscopes And so we have the concept of sub-epics and sub-issues and various issues that talk about those things So that that's one area of portfolio management that we could pursue And then the other area is capacity management or or pen planning with capacity and then so I'll talk about why capacity management is not here, but capacity management would be things like you know this month you have 30 points of capacity and then next month you have 35 and then you you store those numbers somewhere and then Get that becomes smart and also tells you that You should really have 40 points or something that based on how you perform in the past and so on and so forth So that's all well and good I Don't know if we would use that ourselves. I pinged a couple of folks I think Sean you said that you would at least use one feature where you put a number on the top of a milestone list board but beyond that Actually when I talked with customers They they also say they want this but they definitely want the work breakdown structure more and so that's why I I've broken that down Not I'm not intended on what sub-epics would be and then some Some I think pretty obvious follow-ups to that So so let's go into sub-epics in detail today But I wanted to mention that that larger context and then in particular Yeah, so there's several ways to break down work and so we're not really reinventing the wheel you can take Issues and have some issues and I think we would use that for at least the product issue in the front and the back end issue So that's an obvious thing that we would use but it's not clear to me how Gillab would use sub-epics. I guess Actually, I would use it myself because you know all Like these would all be under a sub-epic right right now. They're they're separate and then or sorry like these three are Talking about sub-epics so they would be under one epic. So I guess I would use them. So I take that back but Right now at least we're managing it without it and then I don't see us Well, maybe in the future we would use that. I don't know. Let me take that back But for sure I know that large organizations that have a lot of work And they want that visibility rolled up that this is where it's coming from And then so I have these three Epics that I've scoped out and have some high-level functionality to talk about those and then the these these are follow-up functionality Including this one that are pretty that are pretty straightforward like auto close epic is straightforward epic swim lanes and so on and so forth um And then one other exercise that I did That I put in the it's linked here That yobb started asking me to do so it's sort of like um, again, it's not very It's not very, you know new or anything spectacular But this concept of a flow and so if you do, you know, there's a bazillion ways to do Sort of product planning and figure out what features to build And this is one way that people like to do things which is just to Instead of creating just individual features create a flow A potential flow or you know in talking with customers and talking with users figure out how people would use your product and And and figure out a flow. So for example um When I worked in a non-remote company, I did a similar exercise and we had a brainstorming session about What do you do as a flow to get to work? Right? And so it would be radically different now right because it would be wake up rush my teeth eat breakfast Take a you know take public transport or or you know ride a bike take an uber And then maybe if i'm really good I I I would go to the gym At the I had a gym at my at my workplace And then they also had like sort of crappy free breakfast So then the breakfast would be at the workplace So then then you would just like the exercise would be about outlining that flow And then so the flow of going to work and then so once you have that flow and then you look at Which features you you have and you don't have and then you would prioritize certain features And so certain features you would have workarounds, right? So so again the example would be You know, do you really need to brush your teeth? So it depends on your standard and your and your and your hygiene standards So maybe you don't need to brush your teeth because that's okay. And so for some people that's really critical So so you would knock that out as a as a feature not to build And stuff like that. So sort of a silly example, but this flow is trying to capture this Specific scenario um, and then so What I've shown here is, you know, a product manager Creates a high-level ideas turn them into small smaller ideas Works with the various teams to scope out those ideas And then turns it into a roadmap and you execute and you track it. So We have most of that we can do most of that inside good lab But certain things we can do for example is is sub epics or If you wanted to break down High-level ideas into small chunks start scoping out work. We can't do that right now. So that's in this flow. This is a gap Estimating effort we can barely do that Viewing the plan scope and effort And so when you want to plan that type of work inside a board, which I think is is a great way to do it You can't really view it from epic level And so Pedro had this idea to do swim lanes and use epics for that So I think that's a great idea. So so this was something that yoke asked me to do just in general But what's really interesting as I was working through sub epics I had a couple of flows and eventually just became this one big flow And then so everything is more or less all these Future epics are captured in here So it's something that you can look at and ask like why don't we have that? Why don't we don't have a certain thing and so on and so forth? So again back to capacity management that is not here, right? So If you want to plan say across teams, right? So if you have A higher level of planning and you have teams that have less people or more people and you need to borrow team members Or somebody goes on vacation This flow doesn't capture it right because it is Estimate effort and plan scope and effort in milestones accounting for available capacity This is All in here and it's not like you can imagine this in this particular flow You would take this item and break it down further And then account for capacity more using the tool more specifically But it's almost like you need a spreadsheet here to do that right now And it's not accounted for so I wanted to call that out specifically What is not here another thing that's not here is like doing the actual work like that's you know that the create team is more or less involved in that so You view your plan you do your actual work and then you track the progress So doing your actual work is a flow right and so that day-to-day thing or Or even what we're responsible for like using assignee Lists on a board and seeing it day to day what people are working on that's not really here So that's something again that's absent from this flow and we would you know chat about or talk about it and separately So questions on comments on the motivation and high level things before we actually dig into At least what I think would be a good vision for sub-epics None for me Okay, so So so for sub-epics So so let me step back. So we have sub issues and sub-epics. Um, so to me there's um One one interesting issue that Um, I can bring up is is this one so So, uh You can I'll send this issue. Um In some of this discussion, I'll link it in the slack channel So here And so you folks can read it if you care but basically this issue was Mark saying like, oh, why don't we just make epics a sub type of issues, right? And so he said like if we do that then everything will be simpler It would be easier to code blah blah blah and so on and so forth So I think I even mentioned you Sean at some point you so you might have got pinged on this But you probably said like I don't need to answer Um But Did I ping you? Yeah, I did. So, um But basically that go ahead Sean Yeah, no, I was just gonna say I saw it but um, yeah, nothing. I think well You know, it's one of those things where I think It's self-evident I just I just think like, you know, I think you did a great job of responding and like I don't want to like muddy the waters Okay, sure Yep, it's not a problem. So, um This issue I really like this issue, you know, I was annoyed because it's like, oh no I have to answer one of these issues again and justify like our thinking but then I really enjoyed it because it challenged our thinking and it really solidified At least my thinking I want to share with you folks, which is um Yes, we made an epic and we didn't call it an issue a long time ago, right a year ago More than a year ago now and so Did we make a mistake and so so I argue in all these paragraphs here The only mistake that we may might have made is that we might have called an an epic and epic instead of like a group issue Right, so that's the only change that that might have been a bad choice um, but other than that what we did is we created an abstraction at the group level and then as you know, I In speaking with Sean and then I think Yarka was the first person that worked on this, right Sean Um, she said that, you know, all we had to reinvent all these sidebar things. So this benefit. I'm repeating this for benefit of available um For the at the group level because unfortunately when we created issues Or the I guess the issuable type or whatever it's called in code Only applies at the project level and it doesn't apply at the group level. So when we invented epics, we had We're still reinventing all these things at the group level so we have an abstraction at the group level and we have an abstraction at the project level and then so I strongly think that we need these two abstractions. We need these two types of scoping of work at the group level and at the project level um and so we didn't We didn't waste any time because we had to arrive at that anyways We had to do that work and now the next stage beyond that work is at the project level Should we we probably should have a concept of nested A sub grouping of or sub nesting of issues and same at the group level. So group level so again some Nesting of objects for the group level and then we're just going to call them sub epics for now. So if we if we Chose to call them group issues in the beginning We would probably that may have been come easier because then we could have said like group issues versus project issues But now we don't really have to make that difference. So the naming thing is I'm not too worried about that because we can just clearly say oh epics are a group level thing And issues are a project level thing and then that's really clear in the documentation and when we talk with users and in the product And then when we do nesting we do it at the group level and we also do at the project level and we have to connect them obviously And then if you read through this issue, there's this concept about oh, we have epics So should we also have group issues and the answer is probably Probably no because we'll just We don't have to create another object called a group issue. We'll just create an a tier of epics that is At a lower tier. So we have all epic functionality is at the ultimate tier And then if we have certain functionalities we want to bring to lower tiers in the future We'll still call it an epic, but we just won't have all the the high level functionality there So I think everything is still consistent But this is relevant to your point animal, which is How we wanted to do this type of abstraction And so when I look at this picture, which is an awesome picture by the way Oh my goodness that bugs doesn't have text. Um Yeah, did you see sorry? This is a derail. Did you see Stan's Investigation and number of things that needed to be fixed for that. I saw yeah No, but this was like two weeks ago and he was like, oh, this is fix like two libraries Get lab rails and something else. So that's why it's still not I'm not trivial Okay, okay understood. So I'm not complaining. I mean I complain a lot about a lot of things But this is one of the things I can work through Um, so another quick question. What did you use to make this animal? Does you Um, I just use sketch. I don't have Okay, so one of these days I'm gonna learn But before my previous job and and this job I was I was gonna learn sketch, but it didn't happen because it was two weeks Remind me and I'll send you the youtube videos I watched Oh, okay to Yeah, maybe one of these days I've learned it, but um, yeah, this is exactly what I have in my mind like in terms of Substructure and I think what you were saying is that For users if we present to them this side of like a theme and initiative Then it's easier for them to understand is that like I don't want to mischaracterize So why don't I let you jump in and sort of explain what you're trying to communicate here? Yeah, I was trying to wrap my head around just If we just keep on having sub epic under sub epic under sub epic we end up with This hierarchy that doesn't really mean as much as it should. It's not a pyramid anymore. It's just like a straight vertical line Um, so I was just looking at other agile things and I full disclosure I took this pretty much straight from elastian because they have just a ton of documentation um, but I know we don't want to get bogged down with terminology and force users to use this Very specific agile structure But at the same time we talked about how sub isn't a isn't really the correct word to use for sub issues and sub epics But when I see the original design where it just has, you know, your epic page and then it's got a list of epics But you're already on your epic page to me. It looks like is it related? Are they Nested I have no idea. So I think getting the terminology down is is a big part of this and I Yeah, I just I didn't I don't know the use case where you'd need to have like 10 levels of epics because I don't think they're really Ethics anymore if that's the case you basically Created this structure of your own, but yeah, I think that's a really good point because like Obviously we said sub epics isn't the word we want to use anyway, but like the word epic like Is as far as I'm aware comes from the idea of stories and we don't call our issues stories. So there's kind of a confusion there, but like, right You know these themes and initiatives I don't really belong with epics and stories like in a in a terminology sense either, right? Like there's not really a clear conceptual Yeah, yeah namings and I think I think I agree with anabelle that kind of Assuming that this is what anabelle was saying that like punting and just saying You just have like epics nested like groups doesn't really like solve that problem. Like, you know, it just Because there's already ways you can organize epics, right? Like certainly by label If nothing else So Maybe it's like I don't know I just say like, you know, there's we definitely have different Organizational things available to you and I don't know which should be sort of rigid Which should be not rigid. But I think if we have two super flexible ones, we could just use labels Right. So that was the the design I was looking at and I mean, it makes sense because it follows our other guidelines, but it didn't make sense to me looking at it I was wondering if they were related epics Right, right. So A couple of follow-up questions there. So You said it didn't make sense to have like 10 Whatever, right? So do you mean 10 levels or 10 things across or both? Across unlimited. I think every level Is just a collection of their children and you can have unlimited in every single level, right? But that's where it stops like you if you have an epic and you have a sub epic I don't know when that would ever happen Like unless you made a bunch of epics and realized that that's not the right level You actually wanted an initiative and in that case that is kind of complicated. I don't know how you would transfer that but I don't think a sub epic can really I don't think an epic can be in an epic right so Yeah, yeah, so I don't That's why I I agree with what you've drawn here. Well, I mean it's self to me This what you've drawn drawn here is a self-evident In that naming aside this what you've drawn here is self-evident in terms of The use case right so it's self-evident in that you know This make your lab the best project management tool. This could be you know, this could be an okr or you can you know it could just be like This is what the plan team or one of the things that the plan team is working on For you know q3 of law, right and then it's going to be split up into this work and so on so forth So this is work breakdown structure one-on-one. So this is self-evident and and That's it right and so to me the problem is how do we Make a tool that makes it easy for people to Break down the work and to execute it on so you have this vertical structure and then horizontally in time you have to track it So I think we all agree that this Is self-evident and this makes sense So is the concern that is it more of a naming thing? Or is it more of a constraining the structure so that people are more clear on on how to use things I think it's both. I do think naming is important, but okay Having some sort of guidelines instead of just being you know unlimited everything Right because when you go to look at your epics list or something like that it gets very complicated Do you are you looking at all your top level epics or are you looking at just all of them? And then you know depending on how many deep you go and we have this problem with subgroups is all of a sudden you You can't really show The indentation anymore because it's gotten so deep that it's off the page not that that happens a lot, but it's hard to visualize so so I totally agree with that so so that as a illustrative point is that To me it's it's quite obvious that this type of visualization is Instantly more usable than to say this, right? So one could one could argue like oh when we design this why don't we we make the design like this so to me that's That's relevant from a visual design perspective But I don't want that to Confuse our arguments saying like In terms of the the underlying structure for example So so I don't want us to say that oh like this is a bad design so therefore we shouldn't have A nesting structure. Yeah, I think that that's what I'm trying to say like This this like looks really confusing because I created it looks ugly But this looks really clean and great and so to me this is obvious and so we should have some nesting structure So I think we agree there, but then I think where we have to arrive is that okay So if we agree that this is what we want then how do we Design the feature and build it so that we have this level of thing and then so the concern here for me is Related to our discussion last week or two weeks ago with boards is that Do we start saying that now we have an issue? We have an epic we have initiative and then we have a theme right so to me the building that in the complexity of that That seems really crazy, right? So having more constructs inside gitlab that that um More abstractions that are these three things that are first class citizens seems like a law of complexity And so the way I'd like to think of it is that This everything down here or well their issues, right? They're just project level abstractions or getting back to my original discussion And then these things here are group level abstractions, right? and then So I don't have a great answer for you in that like If I were to work on that assumption, then oh, it would be natural to make epics of epics because that's what we already have And that's the iterative thing um And then that would be confusing and then um Or you can imagine a feature where you label it like shan mentioned but instead of using labels You you have some type of um, you know metadata that says like this is at level one This is at level two and or you can have or you can name that particular epic Like in addition to a title, it's like an epic type or something like that just to indicate Theme initiative and epic and then or you can use templates like I talked about with boards last time just to make drive from that This is what we're presenting to the user instead of epics of epics because what i'm hearing is that that doesn't really make sense an epic of an epic So so i'll pause there Um, oh go ahead no you go ahead Um, yeah, I was I was going to say I've actually kind of forgotten what I was going to say, uh Yeah, it doesn't make sense to have epics of epics at least to me. Um And I do see the complexity of Trying to get a user to see that this is like something that you could do without it turning into a full blown Stereotype product where I barely understood that when I had to use it at my old job um, so When you're starting with a bunch of epics like we have right now What's the next step if you realize at some point that you actually need? To group those into an initiative And then possibly group those two initiatives into a theme. How do you Go about doing that. I'm gonna pause because my baby's sleeping. Um, yeah, I kind of agree with that like, you know Fundamentally like, you know So we have issues and we have epics and we have the debate about like what's the difference between issues and epics One difference is that um, you an issue can reference other issues, but it doesn't really contain them whereas an epic explicitly contains Issues Yep But if An epic can contain another epic Can it also contain issues? Can it like, you know Can it only contain epics of a particular level like you just mentioned now victor like that's If these things don't have like concrete names, it's quite hard for me to visualize what that actually means like, um Because I think there are sort of two Two aspects of tension here. So there's the You give everything a name and you have this rigid structure and we don't want to go that far We don't want get lab to enforce your workflow, but we do want it to, you know Suggest a good workflow, right and make it easy. Yeah. Yeah, exactly Um, and then the second is sort of the Jira thing where you can customize Jira to basically do whatever you want um but then You need to have a lot of expertise in the product to understand how to do that because um, you know Things can be structured however you want Like, you know, that's the downside of it. There's the obvious um, like flip side of that from a product perspective and to me um Whatever we're calling these sub epics or parent epics or group issues or whatever we're calling them That's the fundamental problem. I see is that we if we don't have a good name for them It's quite for me personally. It's quite hard to visualize what they mean because um If they're just epics and sub epics like they're just groups and sub groups that just says to me It's an arbitrary thing that you can nest and you can like have an epic containing another epic containing these five issues and then that other The child epic contains like another five issues and another epic and like I don't really I don't really I I get like how that works technically. I just don't really understand what you'd use it for Like, you know, that might actually be easier to build than something else, but I don't I find it quite hard to understand. Um, so I really like Even if we don't actually go with this, I really like this diagram and these names just because then it gives me sort of a Concrete idea of like, okay You'd use that for this and like, you know from issues down from here We have tasks, which I don't know if we're gonna talk about today, but that's also an interesting point to me Yeah, the tasks were my idea for sub issues, which I also don't know that we get the idea. Yeah, we have we have sub we have task lists That's what I assume these were but if there were something else, oh, they weren't actually but I forgot No, I was gonna say I much prefer those like task lists to kind of a Hassle in a lot of weight like from a technical. Yeah, they're not first-class citizen at all Yeah, and I much prefer the idea that these are like these individual issues that are tasks somehow But I don't know exactly how that would work. Um, right. Yeah, that's that's kind of a derail because we sort of It's really I think it's a like it's the same. It's the same question I have the same issue in task. I feel like I understand the relationship a lot better than I do basically so right so so That that's where I'm leaning I'm so to me this What what I'm envisioning is just replacing these words initiative with epic and then this word theme with epic and I think the what you two are saying is that that already is Confusing to users. It's not as user-friendly as we want it to be. Is that a good summary? I'm sorry, which way around is the confusing way around or To me, this is obviously really clear, but I don't like this in the sense that To build initiative initiative and theme that's it takes a lot more work Um, there's a lot more things to to think about it's a more of a feature and so on and so forth Right from a product and technical perspective. I don't think we want to go away and build a completely different thing called That are like epics but behave slightly differently But use a perspective. I think it's quite useful To talk about them in this way so we can exactly have a concrete because I think The word sub epic which I know you said you don't want to use is quite unopinionated But I think this does need to be a bit more opinionated than that basically right for me personally like, you know Annabelle might have the opposite opinion where for her it's like more sensible to just have this um Epic or whatever you call it that can contain stuff and then it's up to you What it contains and how you structure those because that's more flexible to the user like, you know, this is just my my opinion so So so there's a lot there so so what what I was trying to say is that the epic I'm proposing is that these boxes are all Fundamentally the same thing, you know from a product perspective code perspective blah blah perspective So you get all the benefits of flexibility, you know, it's consistent Um, and then we have to be really smart at designing the lines So that we don't make it too complicated and also the lines are designed in such a way that It's makes it a really user-friendly experience So that even though that they're all epics in name Like they're all the same color the shade of turquoise or whatever Um, but immediately when somebody sees this they can they can picture this in their in their brain without the words initiative and theme Or they can, you know fill in the blanks automatically so that um In the sense that in the same sense that when people look at issues they might just call them stories or whatever or or You know, well, actually, no, that's a bad analogy, but but you can even call our issues now tasks, right? Yeah, exactly exactly Exactly. So the same discussion with tasks actually if we if we've called these if we have some issues in the future I would call them still issues, but you just have ui to add additional lines um, and then my contention it's the We need to have super really good design visual design functional design interaction design So that people understand the uh, the structure immediately And they can apply it to the concept of parent-child Relationships and then use it for their specific needs and so same for here parent-child And so my proposal would be that an epic can have any number of children epics and any number of children issues So in my example my generic structure, this line can also go to any number of issues um And you would have pretty much no constraints Maybe it could even go backwards, but I like I always want to Push toward less constraints and allow the user to be able to Do anything they want, but then we build guardrails or templates Maybe we introduce certain constraints Or or we put like error like not like warning messages to say like something like, you know This epic is already pointing to that epic like like or you have like this weird circular relationship and make a warning In the ui rather than to block them So so that's where i'm leaning toward. Um But anyway back back to my point So this would be like issue relationships now except these uh special epic relationships basically like right right Yeah, because we've already talked about this with issue relationships before like we added related issues And we said like in the future we have the possibility to add um You know blocking issues or parent issues or child issues as a type of relationship We haven't done that yet, but you know that was that was always like I think we talked about So your idea is to basically have the same for epic to epic Relationships and each epic can have epic relationships and issue relationships Exactly. Yeah, maybe I should have started with that and it was it was like no no I think I think the conversation actually helped me understand that so I don't know Like how do you feel about that? Yeah, I think I think that makes sense To let people do what they want to do with gate lab It's it's slightly more confusing to have issues and epics on the same level underneath an initiative And i'm still using these words because it's easy, but victor it was your idea to take our existing epic and That would now be or the initiative would be what our epic currently is Yes, so so so the example would be a customer comes to us and say We're on a tool that does blind and they give this They give this PDF to us or I want to implement this PDF and i'm picking a tool and i'm shopping on the market Can good lab do it and then we say yes it can And then we explain to them that you know the best practice within good lab Is that you would implement this box as an epic you would implement this box in the epic and epic And then you would you know create an epic within an epic and and so on and so forth So that's that's how I would This to me is like a a model a work breakdown structure model of what a team wants and then Let's give them an a solution implementation and then it would be Epics of epics and yeah, so maybe I sure as maybe like sub epics in name is confusing But I was totally thinking about relationships But by by having relationships you don't have they're all the same type of object and by default that's more I don't know if it's more confusing but To a certain degree you need You you you can't just like I can imagine a a feature where You have a template and it would be like A new initiative and then you you click that and then it would create for you One epic and it would have like five sub epics Populated and maybe some of the issues would be populated as well Like that that to me is is a way to to address Like how would people use this it's too confusing and stuff like that Yeah, sorry. I'm just trying to think of that one. So are you are you thinking that we would still have unlimited? at Epics so that's where I can be convinced otherwise and you know I would argue with you forever is sort of like emoji and then I'll let you win like 10 the comments But to me that's that's really something that I've worked with Pedro a lot on like To me and this is again, it's to me. It's totally analogous with the The voting up and down on emoji thing or the thumbs up thumbs down like What's wrong with letting somebody put like 10 epics forever like horizontally or vertically like Maybe like we don't need to like like, you know, they're not children They're they're adults and using the software and so I Pedro would be like, oh, no, that's a poor user experience. You shouldn't do that. And so I'm arguing I see the argument both ways, but I'm arguing from the fact that we should trust users to use The the product as sensibly as they would Adding additional constraints is a lot more work from a product perspective it adds more complexity And that even if we were to add constraints In certain situations, I would argue more for it wouldn't be a hard blocker But there would be some type of UI that warns you that you're you're doing it some Place in a in a way that's really crazy and it's not typical We could even say like, you know, this is not the best practice We this blog post or it might break in the future Something like that versus like a hard Like we limit you to 10 sub epics per epic something like that right, I'm not against I'm not and I also wouldn't assume that the users are going to go crazy. Um, definitely horizontally there should be unlimited because that just makes sense vertically I think that just allowing people to do that is going to be more confusing. Um, and you know, having constraints usually is a good thing For the user experience and in life really, but I'm worried that Okay, can you give an example of why that would actually be helpful like well, I think it would help you Think through a little bit before just creating a ton of issues and then ending up in this Just being bogged down by a number of The same sort of just a pile of epics and issues and then you're trying to make those relationships After the fact rather than thinking it through first and again, I'm not saying the users would do that But it'd be a lot easier to get into that state Yeah, so anabelle, I think I think I get what you're coming from when I think I get it. So Can I just use my own analogy to see if I'm just So if I go back to the issue relationships thing, so forget we have epics at all and you just say you have relationships between issues and we have this Child issue thing that I mentioned before So one thing about that was that like, you know, if we just let you add child issues There's no constraint there. You can't have something Be a child issue of two issues But it can always be a child issue of another issue and so you can easily have Cycles or you can just have like a thousand issues in the project each of which is a child issue of the one before and you have this giant chain of like Parent to child to you know to grandchild to great grandchild to whatever it's like a google google developer interview question Yeah, and that's obviously like, you know Like if you ever wanted to so like because the way related issues work is we only display them in At the moment anyway, we only display them in the immediate parent and child context that that's kind of okay And again, we don't have this feature But if we did it this this will be one way we could do it But if we ever wanted to display this in a way that showed you the overall structure We would need to introduce some constraints so that you can't create a construct to the or some some kind of Guard rails like victor mentioned earlier so that you can't just create something that's ridiculous and doesn't display properly Because if it doesn't display properly then your structure probably doesn't make sense, right? Is that Is that uh, am I understanding your concern here correctly? Yeah, yes, exactly. And again, I'm not I'm not not totally against it either. I'm just trying Without doing any actual designs yet. I'm just trying to Think it through and I couldn't easily think of a a page where I could see That kind of structure while I said you have just a vertical chain. Yeah, and I think I I don't you know, I I haven't thought this through enough to know how much weight to put on that But I definitely agree that it's concerned because if we don't have those constraints then It makes adding any visualization like this afterwards really hard Because we don't know that it will even work. We'll have to test a bunch of edge cases Um, you know, we'll probably spend a bunch more time working on those Edge cases down the line on the front end and on the UX side to like, you know, make them display in a sensible way When really we're not sure if those are things that you we want to encourage anyway um, and if those are things that really make sense from a user perspective to to to do Yeah, I think I think there's various shades of gray there that I think we can argue like As we get there individually, um, like design decision one by one like like number of verticals Like how would you address that? um, my extreme opinion Like or a extreme opinion which my may or may not subscribe to is I don't care if they put 10 and like things run off the page Then you're just using the product incorrectly. I'm not going to spend all this time to build All these features to hold your hand So that that's one extreme opinion and probably something that I would be more Uh subscribed to would be like oh after like the sixth one Or whatever like you have some warning text or maybe it like you hide the add button, right after like the seventh one And but you can still add it, but it hides it or something that Jump in there. We do actually have a constraint on subgroups at the moment. Anyway, right 20 or something. Yeah, I heard that somewhere. Yeah But but I don't even think that there's like is there any I never tried myself But is there any ux actually prevents that like Uh, I think it's a like it's at least a back end constraint like it won't let you there's like a banner message It just says error probably if you you just can't create right and like yeah That's just like a peer performance thing. I'm like, yes, then we'll just build it but To me that's That yeah, so so that Yeah, I made my point already This is a very minor technical point, but I'll just mention it now while I'm thinking about it Um, another thing is that subgroups only work on postgres. They don't work on my sequel and if we do Unaffin United's you can nest however you want. It will be the same there for the same reason But that shouldn't be a blocker because um, we are really heavily pushing people to use postgres Um for a bunch of reasons One of which is that supporting true database. This is quite hard a lot of the time Question about that actually you said um subgroups are not supported by My sequel right that would just yep and is So I have no idea how subgroups are implemented But my understanding with related issues and and similar like this would be quote-unquote related ethics Um, but there really be like parent-child relationships. Um Aren't you just storing like pointers in the database? Yeah, so actually let me let me clarify that if if you only want to know So this is like what I was talking about earlier. If you only want to know the immediate parent or child We can do it in both if you want to know the hierarchy um, we need a feature in sub postgres called uh recursive common table expressions, um, which is um Uh, I think my sequel does have something equivalent for it But not on all the versions we support. Anyway, basically it lets you write a recursive SQL query that says like, okay This is a parent of this so you can Keep going up the tree to get parents Okay, so it makes it really easy to to do though to that type of logic Well, I'm performing as well. Um, it's the other thing but so you don't have to do our logic in the app code Yeah, this is this is kind of a slight derail, but the point I was making there was like, um That that basically depends on whether we ever think Whether we ever think you will want to see the whole structure or whether you only want to see The immediate up and down for whatever part of the structure you're looking at and I think Because you know this This image that we've been looking at for like half an hour looks nice to me And I think there is definitely value in being able to see that whole structure at once that way. That's for sure Um, you know, maybe not even the whole structure But certainly a few levels down because maybe you wouldn't want to see all the tasks at this level But maybe you could zoom in or something on A particular thing to go see tasks, but I think there is definitely value in this and if we Work ourselves into a situation where we can only do the up and down immediately view you sort of lose some of that, although From the way you've described it in the issue like the sort of general high level issue where you've talked about the different steps Um, it is very much talking about one step to the next step. So maybe Maybe the idea is that sort of like, you know, I am concerned with like This level the level above the level below right The my manager is concerned with The the three levels like off-set Above that and so on like maybe maybe that does work. I don't know but these are these are just things i'm thinking They're not particularly constructive contributions. Yeah, no, no This is I think this would be next steps and I'd really rely on on our design team to To figure that out. Um, but but the at least, you know, the cursory thing that I thought about was that When you're on a given epic such as this one, you can see everything downstream if that's the right word And you can't see anything above you except the parent And then if you wanted to see things above you you have to go to that parent Um, so that's my design and I don't like that's definitely not going to be the final design There's going to be probably other ways to look at it or so equivalently if you're at this black box You can see everything So this would be an epic if you're in this Dark green box you can see everything down below But you would not be able to see another initiative than this thing or you would just see the pointer to this But you have no visibility to this. So that that's my way of designing it, um You know way that I think is sane and covers most use cases that make sense but But to me just just I think we should in at least hopefully in the next six minutes we can agree on The structure and then we can the next steps will be more about the visual design Which I think drives the functional design in this particular case So so coming back to all that so Annabelle and Sean, I think you're starting to Agree that we we want to implement this or the design will be relationships essentially And these will all both be these three will will still be of the epic of the type epic Is that is that accurate assumption? I think so. Yeah, okay Um, I'm just gonna reserve the right to change my mind. I mean, that's good Because this is being put on youtube so I'm just gonna just gonna put it there But yeah, I think Yeah, I think in general that probably I think what I'm leading to sorry go on. No, sorry our Ethics are a type of issue that aren't they or no, they're not so they're Well, I don't know what they're how they're implemented in detail, but they're just an abstraction at the group level Right, so it's an object that's scoped at the group level. So you so an epic There's no such thing as a project epic. There's only such things as group ethics And within an epic you can attach Any number of issues to that epic provided that those issues their projects are under the structure Nesting structure of that group So if that's even enough that's Yeah, um Like a couple of reasons that they're not issues Basically, it's it's much easier and more sensible to build them At least the decision we made at the time was and I still think this makes sense to build them Adding the features that are like issues rather than removing the features that aren't like issues Because like for instance, you can't have a merge request close an epic. For instance That doesn't really make sense You can't have a branch related to an epic because an epic doesn't live in a project and there are group level repositories You can't spend time on an epic. You can only spend time on issues There's a there's a bunch of like small features where it's much easier Conceptually to like add the ones we want rather than remove the ones we don't want because it's very easy to miss out the ones We don't want okay That's not to say that we couldn't make them exactly like group issues if we decide that that's the way to go It would just require some quite a bit of free work Okay, I think I thought that just because they look almost exactly the same which is a good probably good thing So in that case, I do think that the three levels in this diagram I don't know why i'm pointing the three levels in this diagram above the issues are All types of epics that makes okay to me Right. So yeah, that's my proposal like we We're inventing these lines, but we're not inventing new boxes. It's my proposal in that show Yeah, I like that way of putting it I also think that we should consider constraints on what the lines can do I'm like, I'm pretty sure you studied math at some point right victor At some point. Yeah, I don't I don't think this should just be a graph. I think this should be a directed graph A dag Yeah Well, I mean that that that that comes back to the the the thing that we talked about earlier like the the warning things and like to me If there's a technical reason to to maintain that it's a sick like directed Then obviously we do it, but to me there's no convincing user reason and then Right now, but you know Annabelle will probably have one and so then I'll be convinced but that's I don't want to create things for the sake of creating them until it's it's clear we need to do it because yeah We can definitely talk about that but basically when I say directed Annabelle.  So from the bottom up everything only belongs to one parent Can have many children, but each child only has one Yes, but also the line only goes up um One level at a time if that makes sense So you're saying an initiative can't have a bunch of issues and ethics Not exactly. It would probably be easiest if I draw a diagram. Hang on give me a sec In the shirt on the screen I was just going to draw it on a piece of paper Doesn't zoom have some thing probably yeah So I think China saying this You can see this right Annabelle. Yeah, okay. Oh, yes. Yeah, exactly that. So there's an arrow on each line which means that um So can you see that? Okay barely Okay, fine Yeah, basically basically what I'm saying is you can't have an arrow going up Well, you can't have an arrow from this epic from inherent sub epics going to theme, right? Right. So what I'm saying is Um, but even if there was a different even if there's another initiative, right? So like inherit sub epic start and due dates Can't have a child epic of another initiative Because it's a different level other because I can only have one parent. Yeah, I think That's already told by that. Yeah, that constraint already satisfies that. Yeah, but but even that like I what I I put pretty much those two A constraints which I think covers everything like having only one parent and having a number of children Um, I I put those constraints in one of the I think in the back end issue but even that I think I could argue could be relaxed if it it's easier to Do so I think that's something that we can talk more specifically during implementation Uh, yeah, I think I think this conversation comes closer to implementation that we need now But now I just think the the design is that we need some constraints on here. It's not a complete free for all right, right, right Yeah, but but again my my point being is that That can be design led. Yeah, exactly the design should drive the the implementation The design led but then performance reasons like you like my sequel blah blah blah that will also back inform it. Um, so So going forward as I start Trying to make a design for this Is there a word that we would like to use to avoid more confusion for these different levels Like should I be doing theme initiative epic issues? Or do we just want everything to become a sub epic? I think it should everything should become a sub epic if we're if we agreed I mean you can disagree, but if we agree all these boxes should be epics um I'm just using the word sub epics.  Yeah, I kind of like epic relationships more Like an epic like in this example an initiative is both a sub epic and an epic Hmm. Okay. Okay So I kind of like the idea of just focusing on the relationships, but I Don't know if that's going to be super clear once we try and explain it to people Okay, well, let's call it Let's call it sub epic stand just because other people won't understand it. I think you're right If you don't mind we could always we could always come up with a couple of ways of explaining See if like, you know, any okay, then let's let's do something crazy. We can always change this skin lab That's just I'm just gonna after this call. I'm just gonna hang up and I'm just gonna rename every At least titles. I'm not going to go into the bodies of issues because it's gonna take me forever I'm just gonna go to all the epics and and issues I have regarding this and just change it to call them relationships And then that's it or maybe call it parent child relationship Because apparently it wasn't obvious to you too and that's that's a failure in communication already and then and then we'll go from there and then But for for animal, I think what you can do is just work on visual designs and interaction designs With the assumption that we're not creating new objects in psyche lab There's still all going to be epics, right? There's this going to be epic page and that's it But how will that how did how are things visualized there whether it's on the roadmap whether it's on the epic page Whether it's on an issue where you can point to the parent so on and so forth That I think is all up to you on how you want to do that Okay, um, and there was still an order, right like road maps was was sort of more in the future. Yes, um and Yeah, yeah, definitely in terms of priority, but I mean None of this we were shipping tomorrow either. So Um, but what I I'd like to start on on this work fairly soon like the next iteration But but you're totally right Like like to me I think the the next time we have a discussion if you have some designs on like the epic page and then just rough ideas on the Roadmap page. I think that would be great. Maybe so let me take that back just the epic page. I think would be great because um I really like this visualization. So I'll shut up after saying this point. I really oh my god, this red I really hate Because it just looks ugly. But to me, it's it's I guess it's useful. So maybe you'll come up something that actually does look like this Um, I think Dmitri created this one Oh my god, I can't undo it. Yeah. His design does look like the one that you think sort of have right. Yeah So this one Dmitri created but this was without sub like without thinking relationships. This was just one level, right? That was not in mind when we created. No, it was actually I take that back. Um So this is epic of epic, but I don't think Dmitri thought a lot about, you know, further nesting and how that would be articulated the breakdown structure But go ahead and think about that go ahead and think about whether an epic should be allowed to have both In this case sub-epics and issues. I I think it we should allow it But maybe you have some convincing design reason to disallow it. So and so let's chat about that next time All right, anything else from Sean animal No All right, um, I will stop


Hey guys, how you doing? This is Rich here and we have a rich TV live and today I wanted to talk to you about Weeble So Weeble is a new app that I've been testing and I've been working with and I've been trying out and I really really like it We myself and some of my partners got in contact with them and they got in contact with us because we have a very large community and We decided that we wanted to become an affiliate of Weeble so what we've done essentially is we've learned now how and I've Started to learn setting up an account how to use this platform. It's absolutely free to use now Unfortunately, if you're Canadian, you cannot actually buy or sell any stocks or do any trading whatsoever with the If you're in America, however, if you're American you can actually sign up I'll have a link down below which is a unique link just for rich TV live members And actually you can get access to two free stocks if you sign up if you put in a hundred dollars You get access to three free stocks, which I think is a really cool tool now One of the things I like about this it gives you analyst estimates So let's just say you want to buy kush bottles. It's at $5.53. You can see analyst ratings You can see the analyst price target right now. It's $8 and 44 cents stocks at $5.53 I like this because it gives me an idea of you know What's going on I can read the basic information about the company company name industry website summary on the company I can learn about the financials of the company as you could see kush bottles revenue is just growing exponentially That's why I really like this company. You can read all the company's filings News Everything is right here at your fingertips with Weeble all in one stop shop Which are really really like and the thing I love about this platform is it's absolutely free Additionally, what we bulls going to be doing is they're going to be adding options trading So they have a lot of different options available here. You can trade China Hong Kong the United States globally Forex trading cryptocurrency Commodities Mutual funds and ETFs and soon they will be offering options trading. So I'm really really excited about Weeble I am just getting comfortable using this platform I'm starting to use it. I have it on my on my desktop I have it on my laptop and I have it on my phone and I'm getting comfortable using all the different indicators and all the analysis Every single day. I'm getting more and more comfortable using this platform So love to know what you guys think now remember rich TV live is strictly for education entertainment purposes Always do your due diligence always do your research before you invest in anything that we talk about here in rich TV live If you're not winning you're probably not watching we try to bring you the winners and we try to bring them to you first We try to bring you tools that can help you and we try to bring you tools that are not going to cost you anything This one is absolutely free However, if you are looking to trade you want to put in at least a hundred bucks So you can get access to three free stocks Okay, and they can be valued anywhere from three to four dollars up to as much as a thousand dollars So imagine you put in a hundred bucks and you get a thousand dollars worth of free stocks What a start, right? So we've got a direct rich TV live affiliate link down below in the description Love for you guys to be a part of it. I'm a part of it. Like I said, I'm canadian So I can't buy or sell with it, but I'm still using the indicators. For example till right currently at 53 dollars And the analyst price rating for this is a hundred and seven So what they're essentially saying with their analysts is that till right has a chance to double I love being able to get other opinions. It really helps me make good decisions when buying and selling stocks So hopefully you too can start to use Weeble And it can be a tool to help you create more success for your trading And your freedom. This is rich from rich TV live We bring in the winners. We bring in the tools and we bring them to you first. It's true What do you think about Weeble? I like it I'm using it every day. And if you like to use it too, I've got a link down below Feel free to click on that link Join the winning team rich TV live and Weeble are going to be working together to help create more Visibility for Weeble and hopefully have more of our members have more tools that can help them win at their fingertips This is your boy rich from rich TV live talking to you about Weeble A trading app that you can put on your phone your computer your laptop and I think it's great and I'm out I'd love to know what you guys think if you like this smash the like button comment down below Share the video everywhere. If I win and you win, we all win. It's true What do you guys think? I'm out peace


Hello, everyone. Welcome to Oxmer Toyota. I'm Gabrielle, and I would like to do a little walk around on this beautiful vehicle. This is a new 2023 Toyota Tundra, and it's the 1794 edition. So it is absolutely beautiful. And the exterior color is in the smoked mesquite, which is exclusive to the 1794. Now at the front, you have this beautiful front fascia. You've got the TRD. This comes with that TRD off-road package. And you have the beautiful LED lighting. And coming over to the side, you are going to have your 20-inch TRD wheels. You've got that TRD in the red right there. Right here on the side, you have that 1794 edition. And now that we're walking on the side, you can really notice the beautiful smoked mesquite color. You are going to have the chrome accents. So you'll have it on the door handles right there on the doors. And then you have your mirror caps and the door seals. Really beautiful. You have that TRD 4x4 off-road on the back. And then when you're back here, the chrome continues. You have it on the handle, your 4x4, and right here on the bumper as well. And then you've got your Tundra in the black accent. Going in to the Tundra. That interior is in the beautiful saddle tan leather. Now that is exclusive to the 1794. You're going to have the 1794 badging in the floor mat. You're also going to have it right over there on the passenger side in that wood grain. Absolutely beautiful. So you're going to have your 12.3 digital cluster. And then you're going to have a 14-inch touchscreen. You're going to have Apple CarPlay, Android Auto, Wireless Charger. You're going to have heated and cooled seating. You're also going to have multiple driving modes. And then you're going to have the ability to switch between too high, for high, and for low.  Really let that sun come in, or clouds in today's case. So going into the second row, this is a crew max. So you are going to have a ton of space for your passengers. Now this is going to be heated and cooled seating. You're going to have a USB, USB-C, and a 120 volt. And then another thing back here, you are going to have some storage. So all you have to do is lift this up and you have a ton of space that you can put things down here. Another thing that you are going to have for your back passengers is the sunshades. So all you have to do is pull that up and it snaps in place. So great for adults or for kids, really nice. And then you are going to have your enhanced shocks right there. And then lastly, you have your chrome tip exhaust. All right, you guys, if you would like to know any more details or if you would like to stop in, let us know. All of our contact info is listed right here. Thanks you all for watching and I'll see you soon. Bye.


TLO what's Hey I'm trying to shoot vlogs in the month of December man. I don't even know what they should be about man I'm trying to do the whole vlog men's joint Should I just get on there and just talk or should I be doing an activity or should I do a little mixture of both? I'm not sure yet, but I got on here to show y'all my team-making ability Just in case anybody has been doubting me lately That's not what the video is about though. You see the title, but I got twins I got a hot spot of things, but this what I just made though And did I boil water on the stove? Absolutely not Come on now. I'll do this. I really do this and just in case you thought it was a game Come on now. I know you get me. I Like mine milky. Sorry spilled a little bit man Right now I'm about to go live on some late night stuff. I'm gonna edit this video as well So I got the little setup you feel me that monitor That monitor I'm about to edit something y'all about to see me edit so I Don't know. Maybe this will come out tomorrow. It should come out tomorrow. That's a good video lucky. I Made chicken. Oh my bad. I made chicken parm or how do y'all call it parmo? I made a parmo From scratch all by myself Not surprising. I am a classically trained Michelin's Michelin chef I've been in the kitchen with Gordon Ramsay Just a multitude of Chicago chefs And I'm really like that I'm like that with a stove And you know, I'm not the most Traditional I know I just said I'm with the lighting in here is bad There we go, I know I said I'm a classical trace traditionally trained chef but like some of my methods Some of my methods are not normal Just check out the video man. Let me know what y'all think brown leave it like comment subscribe if I did good Leave it like man. What's the like goal for this video?  I know I've been absent for a little while, but I wanted to do something Something good something crazy. You know I'm saying and now as you see by the time of the video I'm doing the chicken parm starts off with a little Béchelamel sauce. That's what it's called Béchelamel Yeah, get me the saucepan Put some butter in it Boom, that's a couple tablespoons Little garlic for flavor That's okay, and please don't think I know how to do this off the top of my brain because I don't but you know Next we're gonna put perp flour in it two tablespoons of flour We want to mix that in until it's smooth. All right, that's the kind of consistency you want to go for now We want to add some milk, right? Whole milk none of that extra other stuff that I've normally be getting but add it in you want to whisk it Whisk it a little bit at a time. I Don't have a whisk. So I'm using the fork. We want to get this until a nice thicker consistency So hold on. All right. Now that that has thickened up Yeah, yeah, we're gonna put it on a little light simmer on another boiler to get a little thicker We put some salt If I open the salt though first you've got to open that thing put some salt put some pepper and Parsley cuz we're fancy We got a bachelor nose off on to my chicken. It's huge chicken. Okay. All right. I got my chicken clean. I Cut it in half because it was too big pause Let's get it. Let's get the flour prepared. We got a season the flour. Hold on. All right to season the flour We got onion powder Salt pepper cayenne pepper and that's it and I don't know if you like me But look this how we season stuff we put it in the bag. We shake it up Season flour Now this is the part. We're all waiting for this is the part where we have to beat our meat Okay, cuz we want that flat Now depending on how flat you want it. It really don't matter It's just make sure it's flat and even on all sides Chicken in bag because I don't have a Ziploc. I don't have anything to beat my meat with either. So, okay I'm gonna improvise It's working just fine Okay, that was a little ridiculous. This is better. I'm gonna just use this methods may not be traditional, but they work Yeah, get me Okay, we got season flour beat meat breadcrumbs Part panko we need some eggs. I got to I don't have a bowl big enough to dip it in there So this is the air fryer Thing so, you know, we make it happen over here eggs I definitely don't have a pot pan to make this in so this is a you know what this is a thing Put some oil in it heat it up. It'll work the same, right? I'm sweating We don't make excuses we just make it happen here, so we got chicken Seasoned flour. It's a lot in there. Just it's in crevices eggs breadcrumbs Bechamel, and I got some cheddar cheese in the refrigerator.  It looks very hot. I'm gonna turn it down a little now I want to do this with with safety in mind, okay? if you are not an adult even if you are an adult is questionable Here we go. Definitely you have to heat too high. Okay It's calm now We're gonna let that cook for like four or five minutes All right, so we got the chicken is done now. I'm gonna put the best lemon sauce on there It came out a little thicker than we had it earlier And this at this point you got to grab cheese. I got a cheddar Monterey Jack blend Got a cheddar cheddar cheese Gonna go on top and then I'm gonna get the cheese to melt Y'all be putting it in the burner And y'all got chicken parmo Made it from scratch me myself and I Don't hate in the comments for the test it out I'm just gonna throw myself Right on into it.  I'm not bad I'm sure it's better when y'all do it But you know y'all know I'm a five star Michelin chef, so it hit You get me If I could do anything different I would probably like put more seasoning in the best lemon sauce like some cayenne pepper or Anything to give it like hold on hold on hold on hold on hold on Everything that gave it the profile that I needed that's it Yeah, that's all these with a little bit spike. We're gonna do these