You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Nominations and juries are great, but they are also a bottleneck, not to mention intrinsically biased. My dream for DINAcon, or rather just DINA, is that there is an open source, self-service mechanism for evaluating any process or initiative. This score could be communicated in some way that encourages discussion and hackathons. It would be data-driven, referencing evidence from research and case studies. The Awards as we know it would be a scaled up version, following a process of due diligence and comparative analysis. There would be a lot less guesswork, and an all-year-round service to the community.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Nominations and juries are great, but they are also a bottleneck, not to mention intrinsically biased. My dream for DINAcon, or rather just DINA, is that there is an open source, self-service mechanism for evaluating any process or initiative. This score could be communicated in some way that encourages discussion and hackathons. It would be data-driven, referencing evidence from research and case studies. The Awards as we know it would be a scaled up version, following a process of due diligence and comparative analysis. There would be a lot less guesswork, and an all-year-round service to the community.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: