"What concrete things could Mozilla Drumbeat do to support people
creating civic and social value on the web (e.g. open gov or open
edu)?"
This flows from various discussions that have started with Brian,
Mitchell and Gunner.
It would be good to get your thoughts, either here or in the survey or
both. Also PLEASE FORWARD THE BLOG LINK to people working in social
and civic tech space (especially Gina).
ms
PS. Here is the text of the blog post:
Over the last few days, a number of people have floated the idea of
using Mozilla Drumbeat to support people using open source and the
open web to bring civic value to the internet. There are more and more
examples of this. Open source healthcare. Open education. Open
government data. And so on. The number of people blazing trails areas
like these is growing.
An obvious question emerges: what concrete things could Mozilla
Drumbeat do to support people creating civic and social value on the
web? (answer survey)
It could be that the answer relates back to other issues we've been
talking about for Drumbeat: looking at the intersections between
things like data / privacy / mobile and people working on things like
open govt / healthcare / education / etc. Or, it could be different
altogether, helping people tap into the 'open model' or tackling
specific challenges like publicity or fundraising. And, of course, it
could be that there is no role for Mozilla or Drumbeat here at all.
Before going any further with this idea, it would be helpful to hear
what people think. I've asked the question above Rypple survey and
have started a discussion thread. Answers in the next 24 hours are
especially helpful.
If it turns out there are ways the Drumbeat could be useful in this
area, we'd then need to move to the question: 'is this a good fit for
Mozilla?'.
The open web is a difficult concept to convey to the average browser
user. As both the user interface designers and the support team at
Mozilla will tell you, the average Firefox user has trouble
distinguishing where the browser stops and the web begins. “Openness”
is an even more abstract concept for most web users.
This leads me to believe that giving the user a good WIFM (”what’s in
it for me”), argument is the best way to illustrate the advantages of
the open web. The recent Internet Health Check initiative that
accompanied the Firefox 3.5 release is an example of what’s in it for
the average user. But, internet security is an issue fraught with
technical complexities that make the eyes of even advanced browser
jockeys glaze over.
I’m beginning to think that the easiest way to illustrate the
advantages of the open web to the largest number of users is to take
up the banner of the open data movement. It’s pretty easy to show how
the availability of public data for remix can enable great things on
the web, and the lack of it can stifle innovation on the web.
I agree that "a good WIFM (”what’s in it for me”), argument is the best way to illustrate the advantages of the open web."
Open Data seems like an important element to highlight, but I think the open web is about more than this, and DrumBeat should be careful to not narrowcast too much.
On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Richard Milewski <rich...@milewski.org> wrote:
> The open web is a difficult concept to convey to the average browser > user. As both the user interface designers and the support team at > Mozilla will tell you, the average Firefox user has trouble > distinguishing where the browser stops and the web begins. “Openness” > is an even more abstract concept for most web users.
> This leads me to believe that giving the user a good WIFM (”what’s in > it for me”), argument is the best way to illustrate the advantages of > the open web. The recent Internet Health Check initiative that > accompanied the Firefox 3.5 release is an example of what’s in it for > the average user. But, internet security is an issue fraught with > technical complexities that make the eyes of even advanced browser > jockeys glaze over.
> I’m beginning to think that the easiest way to illustrate the > advantages of the open web to the largest number of users is to take > up the banner of the open data movement. It’s pretty easy to show how > the availability of public data for remix can enable great things on > the web, and the lack of it can stifle innovation on the web.
This is a really important question that needs to be broken down into
several sub-questions: (1) What are the factors of civic and social
value, based on social science research? E.g., StatCan has done some
wonderful work defining the constructs underlying social capital. (2)
What would those factors of civic/social value look like on the web?
I.e., what are we trying to achieve and how would we know whether we
had achieved it? (3) How could those factors be supported by Mozilla
and its network? What feasible actions could Mozilla take? (4) Of all
the feasible actions, which would be the most effective and the most
relevant to Mozilla’s mandate and capacity? You may already be basing
your question on a body of research that defines civic value/social
capital in the web nation. If not, it feels like we’re jumping
prematurely to question 3 without understanding what we’re trying to
achieve. Mark, if you like I could look around for some of this
research and summarize it – could you post the material and
researchers that you are working with now?
On Oct 12, 6:42 am, Steve Anderson <stevein...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree that "a good WIFM (”what’s in
> it for me”), argument is the best way to illustrate the advantages of
> the open web."
> Open Data seems like an important element to highlight, but I think
> the open web is about more than this, and DrumBeat should be careful
> to not narrowcast too much.
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Richard Milewski <rich...@milewski.org> wrote:
> > The open web is a difficult concept to convey to the average browser
> > user. As both the user interface designers and the support team at
> > Mozilla will tell you, the average Firefox user has trouble
> > distinguishing where the browser stops and the web begins. “Openness”
> > is an even more abstract concept for most web users.
> > This leads me to believe that giving the user a good WIFM (”what’s in
> > it for me”), argument is the best way to illustrate the advantages of
> > the open web. The recent Internet Health Check initiative that
> > accompanied the Firefox 3.5 release is an example of what’s in it for
> > the average user. But, internet security is an issue fraught with
> > technical complexities that make the eyes of even advanced browser
> > jockeys glaze over.
> > I’m beginning to think that the easiest way to illustrate the
> > advantages of the open web to the largest number of users is to take
> > up the banner of the open data movement. It’s pretty easy to show how
> > the availability of public data for remix can enable great things on
> > the web, and the lack of it can stifle innovation on the web.
> > For more on this please see the blog entry athttp://richard.milewski.org/archives/411 > > for my rationale as to why open data should be a focus of Drumbeat.
In general: I agree open data is compelling space for explaining / open web as a public resource.
My question is whether open data narrower than we would want to go? Could we also make the same point w/ open education, healthcare, etc.?
Also, I have a question about Mozilla's value add. There are many great orgs in open gov't data, but no one connecting the different open civic spaces. Could we be more helpful as connector?
I don't know the answers. But these are questions I am mulling.
> The open web is a difficult concept to convey to the average browser > user. As both the user interface designers and the support team at > Mozilla will tell you, the average Firefox user has trouble > distinguishing where the browser stops and the web begins. “Openness” > is an even more abstract concept for most web users.
> This leads me to believe that giving the user a good WIFM (”what’s in > it for me”), argument is the best way to illustrate the advantages of > the open web. The recent Internet Health Check initiative that > accompanied the Firefox 3.5 release is an example of what’s in it for > the average user. But, internet security is an issue fraught with > technical complexities that make the eyes of even advanced browser > jockeys glaze over.
> I’m beginning to think that the easiest way to illustrate the > advantages of the open web to the largest number of users is to take > up the banner of the open data movement. It’s pretty easy to show how > the availability of public data for remix can enable great things on > the web, and the lack of it can stifle innovation on the web.
1. Would love any research or framing you can offer along lines you suggest.
2. Our working definition of 'civic and social value' is very simple (and mechanical?) -> things that would traditionally qualify as charitable or public sector work (e.g. education or human rights).
> This is a really important question that needs to be broken down into > several sub-questions: (1) What are the factors of civic and social > value, based on social science research? E.g., StatCan has done some > wonderful work defining the constructs underlying social capital. (2) > What would those factors of civic/social value look like on the web? > I.e., what are we trying to achieve and how would we know whether we > had achieved it? (3) How could those factors be supported by Mozilla > and its network? What feasible actions could Mozilla take? (4) Of all > the feasible actions, which would be the most effective and the most > relevant to Mozilla’s mandate and capacity? You may already be basing > your question on a body of research that defines civic value/social > capital in the web nation. If not, it feels like we’re jumping > prematurely to question 3 without understanding what we’re trying to > achieve. Mark, if you like I could look around for some of this > research and summarize it – could you post the material and > researchers that you are working with now?
> On Oct 12, 6:42 am, Steve Anderson<stevein...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I agree that "a good WIFM (”what’s in >> it for me”), argument is the best way to illustrate the advantages of >> the open web."
>> Open Data seems like an important element to highlight, but I think >> the open web is about more than this, and DrumBeat should be careful >> to not narrowcast too much.
>> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Richard Milewski<rich...@milewski.org> wrote:
>>> The open web is a difficult concept to convey to the average browser >>> user. As both the user interface designers and the support team at >>> Mozilla will tell you, the average Firefox user has trouble >>> distinguishing where the browser stops and the web begins. “Openness” >>> is an even more abstract concept for most web users.
>>> This leads me to believe that giving the user a good WIFM (”what’s in >>> it for me”), argument is the best way to illustrate the advantages of >>> the open web. The recent Internet Health Check initiative that >>> accompanied the Firefox 3.5 release is an example of what’s in it for >>> the average user. But, internet security is an issue fraught with >>> technical complexities that make the eyes of even advanced browser >>> jockeys glaze over.
>>> I’m beginning to think that the easiest way to illustrate the >>> advantages of the open web to the largest number of users is to take >>> up the banner of the open data movement. It’s pretty easy to show how >>> the availability of public data for remix can enable great things on >>> the web, and the lack of it can stifle innovation on the web.
>>> For more on this please see the blog entry athttp://richard.milewski.org/archives/411 >>> for my rationale as to why open data should be a focus of Drumbeat.
OK, will look up research on this topic - it's not straightforward. In
emerging nations, there are several steps to creating a civil society,
beginning with a transportation and communication infrastructure
(roads, telephones), then the rule of law, governance structures,
agreed-upon rules of conflict resolution, and then health care, social
services etc on top of all that. I'll look for the literature that
seems most relevant to state of the web nation, and see what comes
up.
Is there a timeline that you are working with?
- Gillian
On Oct 13, 12:21 am, Mark Surman <mark.sur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 1. Would love any research or framing you can offer along lines you suggest.
> 2. Our working definition of 'civic and social value' is very simple
> (and mechanical?) -> things that would traditionally qualify as
> charitable or public sector work (e.g. education or human rights).
> MS
> On 12/10/09 8:32 AM, Gillian Kerr wrote:
> > This is a really important question that needs to be broken down into
> > several sub-questions: (1) What are the factors of civic and social
> > value, based on social science research? E.g., StatCan has done some
> > wonderful work defining the constructs underlying social capital. (2)
> > What would those factors of civic/social value look like on the web?
> > I.e., what are we trying to achieve and how would we know whether we
> > had achieved it? (3) How could those factors be supported by Mozilla
> > and its network? What feasible actions could Mozilla take? (4) Of all
> > the feasible actions, which would be the most effective and the most
> > relevant to Mozilla’s mandate and capacity? You may already be basing
> > your question on a body of research that defines civic value/social
> > capital in the web nation. If not, it feels like we’re jumping
> > prematurely to question 3 without understanding what we’re trying to
> > achieve. Mark, if you like I could look around for some of this
> > research and summarize it – could you post the material and
> > researchers that you are working with now?
> > On Oct 12, 6:42 am, Steve Anderson<stevein...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I agree that "a good WIFM (”what’s in
> >> it for me”), argument is the best way to illustrate the advantages of
> >> the open web."
> >> Open Data seems like an important element to highlight, but I think
> >> the open web is about more than this, and DrumBeat should be careful
> >> to not narrowcast too much.
> >> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Richard Milewski<rich...@milewski.org> wrote:
> >>> The open web is a difficult concept to convey to the average browser
> >>> user. As both the user interface designers and the support team at
> >>> Mozilla will tell you, the average Firefox user has trouble
> >>> distinguishing where the browser stops and the web begins. “Openness”
> >>> is an even more abstract concept for most web users.
> >>> This leads me to believe that giving the user a good WIFM (”what’s in
> >>> it for me”), argument is the best way to illustrate the advantages of
> >>> the open web. The recent Internet Health Check initiative that
> >>> accompanied the Firefox 3.5 release is an example of what’s in it for
> >>> the average user. But, internet security is an issue fraught with
> >>> technical complexities that make the eyes of even advanced browser
> >>> jockeys glaze over.
> >>> I’m beginning to think that the easiest way to illustrate the
> >>> advantages of the open web to the largest number of users is to take
> >>> up the banner of the open data movement. It’s pretty easy to show how
> >>> the availability of public data for remix can enable great things on
> >>> the web, and the lack of it can stifle innovation on the web.
> >>> For more on this please see the blog entry athttp://richard.milewski.org/archives/411 > >>> for my rationale as to why open data should be a focus of Drumbeat.
Wonderful news! Elinor Ostrom has just won the Nobel Prize for
Economics. She is a political scientist who studies the governance of
common pool resources, and how to prevent the tragedy of the commons.
Her work is highly relevant to the management of the Internet and the
web, and the award of the Nobel prize shows that economics might just
be starting to recognize the fundamental role of social institutions
and civil society in successful economies.
On Oct 13, 11:12 pm, Gillian Kerr <gk...@realworldsystems.net> wrote:
> OK, will look up research on this topic - it's not straightforward. In
> emerging nations, there are several steps to creating a civil society,
> beginning with a transportation and communication infrastructure
> (roads, telephones), then the rule of law, governance structures,
> agreed-upon rules of conflict resolution, and then health care, social
> services etc on top of all that. I'll look for the literature that
> seems most relevant to state of the web nation, and see what comes
> up.
> Is there a timeline that you are working with?
> - Gillian
> On Oct 13, 12:21 am, Mark Surman <mark.sur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hey Gillian
> > Good points. Two responses:
> > 1. Would love any research or framing you can offer along lines you suggest.
> > 2. Our working definition of 'civic and social value' is very simple
> > (and mechanical?) -> things that would traditionally qualify as
> > charitable or public sector work (e.g. education or human rights).
> > MS
> > On 12/10/09 8:32 AM, Gillian Kerr wrote:
> > > This is a really important question that needs to be broken down into
> > > several sub-questions: (1) What are the factors of civic and social
> > > value, based on social science research? E.g., StatCan has done some
> > > wonderful work defining the constructs underlying social capital. (2)
> > > What would those factors of civic/social value look like on the web?
> > > I.e., what are we trying to achieve and how would we know whether we
> > > had achieved it? (3) How could those factors be supported by Mozilla
> > > and its network? What feasible actions could Mozilla take? (4) Of all
> > > the feasible actions, which would be the most effective and the most
> > > relevant to Mozilla’s mandate and capacity? You may already be basing
> > > your question on a body of research that defines civic value/social
> > > capital in the web nation. If not, it feels like we’re jumping
> > > prematurely to question 3 without understanding what we’re trying to
> > > achieve. Mark, if you like I could look around for some of this
> > > research and summarize it – could you post the material and
> > > researchers that you are working with now?
> > > On Oct 12, 6:42 am, Steve Anderson<stevein...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> I agree that "a good WIFM (”what’s in
> > >> it for me”), argument is the best way to illustrate the advantages of
> > >> the open web."
> > >> Open Data seems like an important element to highlight, but I think
> > >> the open web is about more than this, and DrumBeat should be careful
> > >> to not narrowcast too much.
> > >> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Richard Milewski<rich...@milewski.org> wrote:
> > >>> The open web is a difficult concept to convey to the average browser
> > >>> user. As both the user interface designers and the support team at
> > >>> Mozilla will tell you, the average Firefox user has trouble
> > >>> distinguishing where the browser stops and the web begins. “Openness”
> > >>> is an even more abstract concept for most web users.
> > >>> This leads me to believe that giving the user a good WIFM (”what’s in
> > >>> it for me”), argument is the best way to illustrate the advantages of
> > >>> the open web. The recent Internet Health Check initiative that
> > >>> accompanied the Firefox 3.5 release is an example of what’s in it for
> > >>> the average user. But, internet security is an issue fraught with
> > >>> technical complexities that make the eyes of even advanced browser
> > >>> jockeys glaze over.
> > >>> I’m beginning to think that the easiest way to illustrate the
> > >>> advantages of the open web to the largest number of users is to take
> > >>> up the banner of the open data movement. It’s pretty easy to show how
> > >>> the availability of public data for remix can enable great things on
> > >>> the web, and the lack of it can stifle innovation on the web.
> > >>> For more on this please see the blog entry athttp://richard.milewski.org/archives/411 > > >>> for my rationale as to why open data should be a focus of Drumbeat.
|
