Not that we should or could do it better.. but how things are presented, particularly things that are tagged official, or look pretty official, deserves some tighter scrutiny... eg, tumblr as the *official* blog, just as an example.
> Not that we should or could do it better.. but how things are presented, > particularly things that > are tagged official, or look pretty official, deserves some tighter > scrutiny... eg, tumblr as the > *official* blog, just as an example.
> Regards, > Aaron.
-- Chris Saad
FaradayMedia - For Audiences of One Particls - Are You Paying Attention? Engagd - The Open Attention Platform Media 2.0 Workgroup - Social, Democratic, Distributed APML - Your Attention Profile DataPortability - Connect, Control, Share, Remix
Chris, thanks for the note.. and the thoughts would certainly raise other related questions like, other than ATOM, how about OpenSocial, for example.. which would be more like a topic for another group.. Regards, Aaron.
----- Original Message ----- From: Chris Saad To: dataportabilityactionsteering@googlegroups.com Sent: Monday, May 12, 2008 2:29 PM Subject: [DP.AG.Steering] Re: FW: Thoughts on DataPortability
Not that we should or could do it better.. but how things are presented, particularly things that are tagged official, or look pretty official, deserves some tighter scrutiny... eg, tumblr as the *official* blog, just as an example.
Regards, Aaron.
-- Chris Saad
FaradayMedia - For Audiences of One Particls - Are You Paying Attention? Engagd - The Open Attention Platform Media 2.0 Workgroup - Social, Democratic, Distributed APML - Your Attention Profile DataPortability - Connect, Control, Share, Remix
Aaron Cheung <a...@ydrive.com> Mon, 12 May 2008 14:45:20
>Chris, thanks for the note.. and the thoughts would certainly raise >other related questions like, other than ATOM, how about OpenSocial, >for example.. which would be more like a topic for another group..
This particular bit of the debate is not about whether other standards or communities are useful to data portability. It's about which logos make it onto the home page. Close to the home page there really needs to be 3 lists of things that support, and are supported by, DP. - Open Standards eg. OpenID - Open Communities eg. DiSo - Open Organisations eg. MySpace (Ahem! Well, companies that have issued a press release in support of DP then)
Putting all that on the home page is probably a mistake.
-- Julian Bond E&MSN: julian_bond at voidstar.com M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173 Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ T: +44 (0)192 0412 433 Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ skype:julian.bond?chat Do Not Expose To Heat
Aaron Cheung <a...@ydrive.com> Mon, 12 May 2008 12:45:49
>Not that we should or could do it better.. but how things are >presented, particularly things that >are tagged official, or look pretty official, deserves some tighter >scrutiny... eg, tumblr as the >*official* blog, just as an example.
1) It's not a blog. It's a feed of bookmarks. 2) Only one person has control over it. 3) Official? What the hell does that mean?
Don't get me wrong, http://dataportability.tumblr.com/ is a great personal initiative from Chris and it should be encouraged. But no way is it an "Official Blog".
-- Julian Bond E&MSN: julian_bond at voidstar.com M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173 Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ T: +44 (0)192 0412 433 Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ skype:julian.bond?chat Do Not Expose To Heat
To me it also seems that some problems stem from some viewpoint of some communities that we sort of do a land grab. Like we come out of nothing but carry the mandate to solve the data portability problem while others are already working on it or related things. So I wonder if we should also think about revising our mission a bit.
In the end IMHO the most important part is conversation. Be it with web devs in a more grass roots effort or with companies. I actually doubt that those companies really have given us a mandate to solve the DP problem for them (by issueing a press release) because then they need to be more active or they will do something different anyway, like FB). Neither anybody else can give us a mandate.
That being said I would like to see DP more as sort of a think tank and an institution which raises the awareness of the problem (which seems to be working quite well). That means that maybe having a definite set of Best Practices is not such a good idea and talking about trustmarks is neither. Maybe we should more talk about proposals or recommendations which eventually will invite more people to participare in the discussion instead of fighting us. What will end in the end will probably be a mix of everything anyway and only real life examples will show what will work and what won't.
So these are my $0.02 from a somewhat external perspecitive as I am neither active in the other communities nor sitting in SF or close to to experience that closely what actually happens there.
> To me it also seems that some problems stem from some viewpoint of > some communities that we sort of do a land grab. > Like we come out of nothing but carry the mandate to solve the data > portability problem while others are already working > on it or related things. So I wonder if we should also think about > revising our mission a bit.
Yes, there's nothing wrong with running to the front of the parade, but it's also good to embrace the small army behind you.
Just to pick one, as we all know lots of semweb folks have been working in closely related areas for a long time. If DP was perceived more as a conversational focal point and less as a set of technology blueprints, maybe there'd be more engagement from them because they wouldn't think DP was competing with them.
Then again, I could be wrong. It may be a question of bandwidth for any existing group to mesh properly with their DP colleagues.
When one person tells you an ass, laugh. When a second person tells you, shrug. When a third tells you you're an ass, look for a tail.
Where are the hard truths in Messina's message?
First, we've been coming across as assholes. Arrogant, holier than thou, know it all assholes. Appropriating other's logos (faking endorsements). Redefining well defined terms and ideas in our own language. Ignoring prior art (look to the identity commons and IIW, for example). Picking winners and losers as though we have the right.
Second, we lost whatever technical credibility we earned. It's one thing for Chris Messina to tell us this in a private conversation. It's another when he does it in public and at length and with a considered neutral tone. He's the least reactive and most tolerant of all the serious geeks I know. He's not alone in his opinions and wouldn't have gone to the trouble of spelling everything out if he didn't know he was speaking for many others.
Third, we can smell the smoke of burnt bridges. It is now harder to get dp.org calls returned than 60 days ago. Ghosts of deffected supporters and volunteers litter the dp.org's trail. Bad behaviour, at odds with our stated community values, creates cognitive dissonance and makes volunteers and partners lose faith and be unhappy.
It sucks.
But that's where we are right now.
This is a compound crisis.
It's a crisis of perception. A crisis of reality. A crisis of leadership.
How can we use this reality check to deal with it?
Or do we stop becoming a "we" and dissolve the organization?
> Aaron Cheung <a...@ydrive.com> Mon, 12 May 2008 12:45:49 > >Not that we should or could do it better.. but how things are > >presented, particularly things that > >are tagged official, or look pretty official, deserves some tighter > >scrutiny... eg, tumblr as the > >*official* blog, just as an example.
> 1) It's not a blog. It's a feed of bookmarks. > 2) Only one person has control over it. > 3) Official? What the hell does that mean?
> Don't get me wrong, http://dataportability.tumblr.com/ is a great > personal initiative from Chris and it should be encouraged. But no way > is it an "Official Blog".
> -- > Julian Bond E&MSN: julian_bond at voidstar.com M: +44 (0)77 5907 2173 > Webmaster: http://www.ecademy.com/ T: +44 (0)192 0412 433 > Personal WebLog: http://www.voidstar.com/ skype:julian.bond?chat > Do Not Expose To Heat
Wow Phil - big broad sweeping statements there - let me try to respond with my personal thoughts
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Phil Wolff <pwo...@gmail.com> wrote: > When one person tells you an ass, laugh. > When a second person tells you, shrug. > When a third tells you you're an ass, look for a tail.
Calling out questions and comments about the project is encouraged and welcomed - that's the point of an open community conversation. Any high-visibility, large scale undertaking has a tail - maybe even some fur.
> Where are the hard truths in Messina's message?
> First, we've been coming across as assholes. Arrogant, holier than thou, > know it all assholes. Appropriating other's logos (faking endorsements).
Using the logos on the front page was a way to show respect for those standards and direct traffic their way. It was a statement about 'invent nothing' and has been there since the beginning. Perhaps the evangelism team would like to start a HomePage taskforce to deal modify/improve the page?
Redefining well defined terms and ideas in our own language.
That's what you do when you wrap technology with a consumer/mainstream message - so I don't think we should apologize for that. Besides, I think the only time we have done that is to coin the phrase 'Data Portability'.
> Ignoring prior art (look to the identity commons and IIW, for example).
I am not sure we can ever be accused of ignoring prior art WHILE being accused of promoting other groups through their logos. We have spent long conversations speaking to all groups - even started a research phase and podcast series to make sure it happened. I don't think this point is fair to say to any of the people who have worked very hard to reach out (including Trent, Mary, Daniela and others). I know I have personally spent hours and hours talking to anyone and everyone who will listen - many of whom have joined the project and had major impacts on its mission and execution.
> Picking winners and losers as though we have the right.
We have a right to do whatever want want for our own 'best practices'. It's the market's right to use or ignore those best practices. The project was set up to design best practices. That was our goal and it has been endorsed by many.
> Second, we lost whatever technical credibility we earned. It's one thing > for Chris Messina to tell us this in a private conversation. It's another > when he does it in public and at length and with a considered neutral tone. > He's the least reactive and most tolerant of all the serious geeks I know. > He's not alone in his opinions and wouldn't have gone to the trouble of > spelling everything out if he didn't know he was speaking for many others.
Really? Chris Messina would you agree with that? I don't think you would even call yourself tolerant and non-reactive :)
