Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!bionet!arisia!roo!janssen From: janssen@parc.xerox.com (Bill Janssen) Newsgroups: comp.groupware Subject: Re: Groupware Effects on Hierarchies Message-ID: Date: 20 Jul 90 00:47:13 GMT References: <1990Jun24.130413.16511@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <2092@east.East.Sun.COM> <1990Jul1.210621.13137@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <1984@aurora.cs.athabascau.ca> <1989@aurora.cs.athabascau.ca> Sender: news@parc.xerox.com Organization: Xerox PARC, Palo Alto, CA Lines: 24 In-reply-to: wex@dali.pws.bull.com's message of 19 Jul 90 21:31:22 GMT In article wex@dali.pws.bull.com (Buckaroo Banzai) writes: In article janssen@parc.xerox.com (Bill Janssen) writes: The willingness to consider a "pencilled-in" appointment might be stronger than we think. What if we could see "scheduled events", which we have not committed to, on our calendar? Someone sent me email with a similar suggestion. I don't think this would work because it would lead to the person who scheduled the meeting having too high a degree of uncertainty. She'd have to go around and ask everyone whether they were coming or not. This would lead to a huge decrease in the value of the information on the system which would lead to people stopping using it. Ah, but what if by clicking on the pencilled-in suggestion you can either contact the person, reject the time/date suggested, or confirm your attendance? Actually, the design is more subtle than this, and Alan and I have had this discussion before, but a dual scheme -- proposal to the user, and buy-in by the user, with freedom to reject -- is the keystone. Bill -- Bill Janssen janssen@parc.xerox.com (415) 494-4763 Xerox Palo Alto Research Center 3333 Coyote Hill Road, Palo Alto, California 94304