 |
From: "Chris Saad" <chris.s...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2008 10:22:44 -0700
Local: Mon, May 12 2008 1:22 pm
Subject: Re: [DP.AG.Steering] Re: FW: Thoughts on DataPortability
Wow Phil - big broad sweeping statements there - let me try to respond with On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 9:42 AM, Phil Wolff <pwo...@gmail.com> wrote: Calling out questions and comments about the project is encouraged and > 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. 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, 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 > 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 even call yourself tolerant and non-reactive :) > Third, we can smell the smoke of burnt bridges. It is now harder to get not sure who's not returning your call - what calls are you making? > Bad behaviour, at odds with our stated community values, creates cognitive Again things like the logos on the front page can be seen as bad behavior by > dissonance and makes volunteers and partners lose faith and be unhappy. some - even though it was an effort to promote the prior work. Making decisions for what is 'best practices' is the stated goal of the project. That is not misbehavior - it is our goal. Some may disagree with it, but that does not make it wrong. > It sucks. When you say leadership are you referring to me? Or to the other community > 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. members who are cutting time from their day jobs to try to keep a very large project on track? Are you not a leader of the DataPortability project? Are you not running the DIY project and others? Would you like to swap out the participants for someone else? Anyone in the project can be a leader of a task force and change the wiki Leadership is also knowing how to set a direction and sticking with it > How can we use this reality check to deal with it? > Or do we stop becoming a "we" and dissolve the organization? essentially a set of easily remedied questions and concerns. > Phil Wolff Chris Saad FaradayMedia - For Audiences of One You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| |||||||||||||