Cap 20, 00 / Dec 21, 16 02:35 UTC

People are our greatest Resource  

I agree with Leomarquie ... our major resource right now is people ... is there time enough to have a simple fill in resume upon certification to show individuals skills ... languages etc?... this could easily be compiled into a human resource database for Asgardian Skills... here is an example of where this info can be used: ... need for medics skill search would bring up several thousand people in various countries throughout the world... contact could be made to people directly from the certification database in a request for services. The key here is knowing what we have in people resources...knowing where they are ...language requirements ...and finally direct communication with required individuals.

If certification questionnaires are already set...can we do this in the future?...I believe it would give us valuable data showing the vast abilities of our people to ourselves and to others as need be...like a store doing an inventory...we'll know what we've got ...and where they are :)

Cap 20, 00 / Dec 21, 16 14:14 UTC

People, utilised correctly, can be a great resource indeed.

Not knowing the how of much of the backend, this is a little unwise to say. But another DB linked to the citizen DB could readily hold such informations.

To make that a reality, we'll assume SQL is used for the site here, and further assume that links to another SQL hosted somewhere secure with the actual user data(all the site should need(beyond site-specific) is username/pass, some contact details maybe - possibly an ID number to provide reference in the "citizen" DB) which means another DB indexed by ID number could readily hold "skills". Due to the nature of this data - much readily defined as "private" or "sensitive" - even if it's only referenced by ID number - should ideally be stored in secured facilities(say, the passport production building).

The most "difficult" part of implimenting this would be deciding the "fields" that appear on the form - which would directly relate to columns in the DB. "Sensible" structure of this would naturally inherit properties you'd desire.

Once that has been decided then converting that to, say, another page accessible off the profile page would allow users to set initial values. Once there is educational services, that could be tied in to update relevant on completion of courses etc.

Ofc, once populated with data, one would require some method of searching it. A simple form that will perform a DB search should be simple enough to fabricate in less than ten mins, and if designed sensibly provide for future proofing by modular design.

I would suggest making a draft template for required fields and then inviting other users to make/suggest ammendments, adjustments etc to ensure you've not missed anything, catching any errors, sanity evalution etc. Once armed with, that can be submitted to folks what maintain this site and used to rig up the form, and the DB behind it.

Cap 20, 00 / Dec 21, 16 17:27 UTC

Sometimes I wish I had a database degree.....sometimes..lol. The idea is awesome for creating a searchable database. I think the first part would be to put it out to the separate ministries of what they would be needing in regards to categories of experience. Break down the ministries, then break those down further. For example: IT --> network vs. database vs. tier support --> physical hardware vs. software. Create an entry form then associated with each ministry. Add the link into their forum pages, and Asgardians can choose to input their data and work options. I myself have a few years working with cabling and networking computers. I've ran over 2 miles of cable in a building we were configuring for IT support/training. I tested and terminated all the jacks. I'd be willing to do that now for an Asgardian consulate building/server system. I also have a network admin degree and have experience with the server software side as well. We will find that there are people who have the skills in all aspects of our ministries, and are willing to help educate, implement these skills to make our nation better. But the starting point would be to create the database for those skill levels to search, then work to contact those that click, 'yes'..I'd like to work for Asgardia! To add to this point, I think our biggest hurdle with this would be funds available. I don't see putting over 500,000 people on a payroll. I wonder how many people would be willing to volunteer their time without charge to our cause. That's going to be a big hurdle for some. While I may not have a lot of money, I do have a drive to support our cause, and my time and energy I'm willing to give.

Cap 20, 00 / Dec 21, 16 21:11 UTC

I too have time, energy and "skills" to donate. Even with a 10% of total population, that'll be more than enough, I have little doubt that almost every field is covered to at least acceptable margins. Not taking into account how skills are learned over time.

You'd not need a degree in DB in order to deploy this type of setup. Just need to think about what data you'd want to hold, and why. Databases are really simple beasts, the complexity occurs with how you decide to search them - and this type of search is about as simple as it gets, basic pattern/keyword matching.

As for putting 500k on payroll, once the economy has been grown sufficiently, why wouldn't it evolve to a Universal Basic Income type model?

But, yes, first find out what "fields" would be useful in the DB - the rest kinda does itself.

Cap 20, 00 / Dec 21, 16 22:36 UTC

[MOD] Hello! You both have wonderful ideas!! If you would like, you can offer your CV to volunteers@asgardia.space along with a proposal for the database. Thanks!

Cap 21, 00 / Dec 22, 16 04:58 UTC

I apologize if I'm speaking out of turn, but wouldn't the easy way to go about filling the database (a database I would assume would hold every Asgardians information) be to allow Asgardians to work with enrollment personnel who have been trained on a specific type of entry sheet for information, sending individual entries to a team of analysts who can then organize the information into a sensible and readily accessible database? Say for example, that for a final step of acquiring citizenship, members are to fill out entry forms, aided by trained personnel through an in browser chat service, that details experience, degrees/certificates, areas of expertise as well as substudies and areas of interest, general contact information to be used by Asgardian staffing and information personnel, along with other relevant information. After which if there is any confusion as to a particular entry, an information tech can contact them to specify or translate said entry into a selection that would follow the database guidelines for search criteria and cataloguing, using a globally accepted and translated system. Then setting up the search engine for browsing the database to ask for refinement of a given search condition for the best possible results, or instead of a typed search term, using a drop down menu of categories and subcategories to allow for the smallest room for error.

Cap 21, 00 / Dec 22, 16 17:44 UTC

Done right, the form itself would do all the sorting, and organising of information.

Then, obviously, this data is entered into a database. I envision the search process to be muchly like a standard forum post search - but searching people - simple keyword matches with possibly an "advanced" tab to be able to cross reference and layer filters on results. Should provide for all required functionality whilst remaining as simple as possible to construct(the lesser complexity, the less things can go wrong).

Assistance with filling out the form would just mean the form itself is poorly designed. The actuality should avoid ambiguity. It shouldn't be possible to get it "wrong" -=- although, that said, operatives able to assist with any questions people have regarding isn't an entirely poor idea.

  Updated  on Cap 22, 00 / Dec 23, 16 06:45 UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: typo

Cap 22, 00 / Dec 23, 16 10:40 UTC

I completely understand, where I was trying to go with that was in the event multiple people input the same data, but with different values. Where one person puts "brain Doctor", another puts "neurosurgeon" (I am sorry for the horrible analogy), the two people would fall in the same field, but depending on search terms, a person would only find one or the other, or possibly neither at all if they used a value that had the same meaning, but a different wording. It would be like typing into Google a search for "Canine" as opposed to searching for "Dog", even having the same meaning, you end up with two separate lists according to relevance and mere wording. This is why I believe a predetermined set of options, or assisting "operatives" to file the information according to a specified criteria would make navigating the information in the database a great deal easier. Basically taking something and simplifying it to a point that you can't get lost or stuck. So your search would become (for example): Item searched-Person---> Field of Study-Medical---> Area of Expertise-Neurology---> Title-Surgeon or Item Searched-Person---> Field of Study/Profession-Construction---> Type-Industrial---> Craft-Pipefitting---> Level of Training-Journeyman---> NCCER Certified-Yes---> Additional Craft-Yes---> Craft-Rigging---> Level-Journeyman---> Certified-Yes---> Additional Craft-No.

Take for example when you search for pipefitters, even though it seems a simple enough search, you might end up with a board certified plumber instead of an Industrial Construction Pipefitter, not a mistake you want to make when you are trying to build a refinery. The operatives would be there to make sure each field is filled with a value that correlates with the intended value, not one that "seems right". I am not trying to dismiss anything that has been said or suggested at all, simply voicing my opinion in regards to the possibilities and what might be an efficient way to go about the database and data entry.

Cap 22, 00 / Dec 23, 16 14:08 UTC

But just as when you search for "canine" via screwgle, it can on the back end decide that this also means "dog" "chien" or "furry quadrapedeal muchbarker". Considering screwgle returns different searches for different people, as it decides what each individual is and isn't served with regards to end informaiton, I'm not incredibly comfortable with that analogy. But "tags" can be used for catching things.

For both the data input form, and the search form, it's possible to use a dropdown combobox to narrow selectable options. In both cases it's possible to add in another combobox once the first has been assigned a value in order to enter/search for multiple. On the input form, this could additionally create a text input area for which the user could enter dates achieved, certificating authority, educational institution, and other details they would think relevant.

  Updated  on Cap 22, 00 / Dec 23, 16 14:13 UTC, edited 2 times in total.
Reason: typo

Cap 22, 00 / Dec 23, 16 16:24 UTC

Additionally, A field to indicate interest(as opposed to qualification) on various offerings would catch those with no formal qualifications, but potentially relevant experience.

  Updated  on Cap 22, 00 / Dec 23, 16 16:40 UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: typo

Cap 26, 00 / Dec 27, 16 12:22 UTC

well i aprove, i am a programmer if you want i can help,

i want to do a database for ours ideas ,theres a lot of people that give good ideas , or the same idea with diferent throughs, i want to do a DB with all the ideas and put like a submenu in the forum like: "Ideas so Far" and give access a something like DropBox ou Drive wheres we mantain documents , images about projects/ideas

  Last edited by:  Humberto Guttau (Asgardian)  on Cap 26, 00 / Dec 27, 16 12:28 UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: put my idea

Cap 26, 00 / Dec 27, 16 16:24 UTC

I agree the "ideas database" may be a good idea - But that could sensibly contained in a forum section. That would also allow for third party input/refinement, sanity evaluation etc.

Third party storage services isn't wise for anything but the most trivial of data. I would predict we will have such eventually - but to suggest 5GB quota per head, we're currently looking at requiring a 2.73PB storage pool, and 5GB isn't a great deal on the scale of things and population numbers are only expected to rise over time so naturally this might be a little while.

I've already put in a feature request for collaborational tools in order that we may collectively work on documents whilst still retaining rights to the data input.

The offer of assistance is appreciated - If required I was going to do this on my own, but considering our number and diverse skill portfolio it would be insanity to ignore options like crowdsourcing. I'm not entirely sure why development isn't currently centered around. Almost everything needed could of been done a long time ago.

  Updated  on Cap 26, 00 / Dec 27, 16 16:30 UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Additional data

Cap 27, 00 / Dec 28, 16 07:37 UTC

EyeR, That was what I was thinking, as far as the combo boxes. And when you say "tags", are you referring to the search terms themselves or the actual entity being searched for? I also agree with the "interests" section and the text boxes for relevant data in regards to certifications and the like.

Cap 27, 00 / Dec 28, 16 09:23 UTC

@Eyer have alreafy see the post about the fórum having "types" ? Like theres post that could have img and posts that could have Google Docs withins it, ithibk it would be adequated for ours immediate needs

Cap 27, 00 / Dec 28, 16 15:28 UTC

I was using the term "tag" very loosely. These could be both presented to the user as (optional) search terms, and attached to the "entity" in order to provide the largest number of valid matches, across inconsistent search terms.

Google docs being a privacy invasive service that errodes your rights to the data input suggests it is most unwise to utilise in such an initative. Embedding pictures into forum posts is a trivial thing to achieve, but I personally feel this offers no practical gain. IMHO it's far better to offer a link, and then if the user wants to waste their time looking at the picture then they can. For 99.99999% of what we need to do, images are not required. It would also save a lot of space on the server by preventing indiscriminent use of largely useless images being inserted into posts for trivial reasons.