In a discussion about enhancing the yearly review feature for staff, ganncamp highlights that while staff are encouraged to engage in the community, the current yearly review excludes them — which is useful for public-facing reports but leaves a gap for internal staff-only summaries. They suggest generating a second, staff-only review. Moin references a prior suggestion by Samantha_O to allow multiple reviews targeting different groups (e.g., TL4/employees vs. community members). Jagster agrees and proposes adding a group inclusion/exclusion setting, noting that manual generation is feasible but undesirable. sam recommends implementing this via discourse-automation, allowing customizable filters, group targeting, and flexible timeframes (monthly, quarterly, etc.). ganncamp later clarifies a practical issue: the current system’s “staff” group only includes moderators, which doesn’t reflect their broader employee base — making the auto-generated review misleading. Samantha_O empathizes, sharing similar struggles and noting that limiting moderator access (due to PII concerns) is intentional but complicates review generation. The consensus leans toward flexible, automated, group-targeted reviews — ideally via automation plugins — to serve both public and internal needs.
We have a community of product which we run, yes, to help users but primarily to get feedback. That requires our devs to interact in the community to flesh out and act on the feedback. Thus, we expect and actively encourage staff to interact in the community.
One of the things we do to foster this engagement is post internally a weekly staff-leaderboard roundup, E.G.
And while it’s great that we can exclude staff from the year-in-review that will be published to the community, it would be nice if we could generate a second, staff-only review.
Yeah. We would need one setting more: include groups. Or exclude because we can exclude staff already — and I could bet (very little, though) that setting is just an interface for hard coded group limiter
After that it isn’t that big thing if there is not any automation, because doing it manually is just 30 second job (of course we all hates manual labour on holidays, but still).
Our review generated overnight and I came in to find that it’s mostly employees. Not staff because apparently staff is only moderators(?), and we’re stingy with mod rights.
I ran into the same thing It meant I had to do some editing, and I likely had less editing to do than you might have, but we try to keep mod rights stingy as well - with access to PII, we want to control who has that more and it is the priority. Hope you were able to work it all out and either post or edit to make it fit for your community.
