Application Development Organisation Methods (for techies and non techies)


I am posting this in response to a reply to SAFE Cafe post by @hamiltino, and not at hamiltino as the @ suggests, though at the action of the post. I am not a certified whatever project person; though, I’ve seen and observed some failed projects (thankfully not many less than 2) and I’ve observed many Tens of successful projects and I’m writing this based on this. Posts relevant will be content for project management in a concise format and/or bullet lists. The target audience for this thread is for those who choose to form a group for managing projects and developers. And also to serve as a guide to those who are already in a group to optimize their productivity and improve morale for their team.

Consider, that an organizer of development and/or developers is an entirely legitimate role that is often pivotal in the upstart and completion of a project and its ongoing sustainability Without such people there could sometimes be no funding for a project, I don’t even mean salaries - things like computers, books, paper, pens, water, and bread to name a few. Without these developers with brilliant ideas instead don’t make them because of lack of these things being available; therefore, projects are shelved and traditional jobs (where under-performance is expected) are taken up.

Any elaboration by Us within the thread will be edited to the OP with a date; and as I allocate more thought to this I will elaborate more myself.
So this thread is intended for communicating on anyone can organize a development project without the over the top, to establish a goal, set a path, and accomplish a project.

A Team:
A Team is each member, a member who contributes in any way shape or form toward the completion of a project, and its planned existence. Projects can be eternally ongoing in life; therefore, though a upstart journey may end, the project lives on, and the Team will live on with the project despite the decisions of individual members to continue participating or not.

A Leader:
Leadership of a project requires someone who has resolve, a one, who will not have bias towards individuals; however, could discern abilities, and character. The leader will accept that they are a part of the team, and that the term “Leader” does not mean Higher, it simply means that other team members will look at the “leader” and usually will emulate “leaders” composure. If “leader” is not reviewing code, or listening and thoroughly considering the engineers’ explanation, then “leaders’” composure will not be capable of emulating understanding and progress, and also the vision of the project will suffer. Therefore, “leader” should have some amount of knowledge, and also should make substantial effort to know the project that they are working on, though this knowledge could be acquired along the way and usually this is what happens as new things are being made by “engineers”. “Leader” will benefit from knowing who the team is, and also with encouraging progress to be made. There is a torrent of knowledge in the universe and a torrent of humans in the universe and this way a “leader” must suggest that there is a path which will accomplish the main goal. The path is not made of stone, and is more like the sun, a fluid ball of molten gaseous energy, and its color texture and even shape can be changed to fit the environment of the developers and development. “Leader” will do just that, and this is a role of the team; It is a core attribute more so than a required governance as the “leader” could also be an “engineer”, though this paragraph proves that a “leader” doesn’t have to be.

On Leader personal gains:
A “leader” should not make efforts to monetize for themselves personally from the efforts of the team. The interests of a “leader” are not hierarchical, they are communal. A “leader” could monetize the team for the team of which a “leader” is a part of, it will benefit the team and community greatly that personal goals are set aside, and only the project and the path is adhered to and clear.

An Engineer:
An “engineer” should possess the skill set required to accomplish the goals. If there is a lacking the “engineer” should be capable and willing to acquire such skills, and this must be established during planning. If during planning the path is set up for tracks and the “engineer” has tires, then there will be no traction. Therefore, the “engineer” must be sincere in all communication in order for the team to create a valid path which will lead to an accomplished project.

SAFE cafe #10: The Creative Decentralized Future w/ Filmmaker Ryan Martin, Sunday 7pm BST

Someone who organizes and allocates tasks may allow for higher efficiency in some(maybe most) cases. This Person ofcourse needs to have a general understanding of what tasks will need to be completed, the difficulty of them and how everything fits together. Having general literacy in what you are managing is a must.

The post I made was not a criticism of Leaders/managers but of the attempt to monetize or leech of other peoples work.


Thank you @hamiltino for clarifying your intentions, and also for contributing your insight; I’ve edited the post, and added your thoughts.


I might not use the same vocabulary as @hamiltino but I share a similar sentiment. It turns people away from joining a cause because it feels as though the idea is more important than the development. This is a tough one because vision is important but vision without being materialized is just a hallucination. Usually people with ideas get investors then hire a team and then are able to align themselves into a project easily since they funded it and there you go. Not that things need to be same old same old but so far it’s not working so is there even a solution or was it not a problem in the first place?


Software development is different, once you have a computer… a developer can realize anything they want given the proper environment. The purpose of the thread is to get a concise guideline which any person can read and understand a thought process with which that person could take an idea peer review it and safely evolve it to full production if there is support for it; this can be personal or multi person endeavor.

I know my first softwares started with lame calculators for the members of a finance company… I can’t price them they were so lame, though eventually after writing more than 5 different stat analysis applications with more than 190 individual pieces and 30k lines of unique code to one for example each line to make sure each moment is accounted for Only then did I realize that it all started without an expense beyond a laptop computer/… of course after the first few mini applications for the whole I realized I’d be more efficient with 6 screens, two towers, and some virtualizaion and that all cost some pennies. I’m sure other substantiated developers would see the point. Plus the development caught the attention of owners and partners which meant there were 4 leaders who put the project ahead of themselves and just only two software engineers (without degrees or experience) and a mathematician - all starting from one ‘lame’ calculator and an impetus to being creative.

Consider this for a moment, if you want.

I’d also cite the creation of Bitcoin - how do you know if Satoshi Nakamoto was not a homeless hacker lol.