Launching the CC-PMS Working Group

[Michael Maranda]

We've just concluded our first open meeting of the Climate Change - Project Matching System (CC-PMS) working group!

We've inaugurated a google-group mailing list - please join if interested, and spread the word!   

http://groups.google.com/group/cc-pms

We've also started the team wiki page at http://cotw.cc/wiki/Project_Matching

And we have a BetterMeans workstream at https://secure.bettermeans.com/projects/184

We also have a skype chat channel for the cc-pms (or for the cotw ingeneral) -- let us know if you want to be added!

If you need any help with the wiki or bettermeans.com or anything else, just ask!

Next meeting: one week away  (Feb 20)!  Sign up for  one or more of the tracks:  <Tech>, <Data> & <Outreach>!

Regards,

MM

PS    Agenda from first meeting:  http://etherpad.openstewardship.net/PMS-agenda

PPS Link to the proposal document:   http://www.slideshare.net/sureshf/project-matching-summary040211final-6843146

(Although it says final -- everything is fluid!   We want your input!)

[timrayner]

Hello everyone!

Here are some notes on the first meeting of the Climate Change Project
Matching group, which kicked off yesterday at 2pm US EST on Skype.
They are part roundup, part my own tenuous reflections on the topics
under discussion. I compiled them from the Skype chat feed, into which
people deposited key propositions and ideas under discussion. Many
good points were made in the voice chat that were not typed down -
apologies for what I've missed.

First of all, thanks to everyone who participated in this first
meeting of a very exciting project group. There was a great spread of
people, all of whom brought valuable perspectives to the discussion.
Participants included Pamela McLean (http://dadamac.posterous.com),
who expressed an interest in engaging people in rural African
environments in the CCPM system; Randy Fisher, who brings his
background in Open Education Resources (http://wikieducator,
http://oerfoundation.org); Tiberius Brastaviceanu, founder of the spot-
on swarm-theoretical Multitude Project (https://sites.google.com/site/
multitude2008/); and Marius Bauer, founder of the brilliant
collaborative art project Gaia 10 (http://www.gaia10.us/blog/calling-
all-gaians/) and soon-to-be launched http://gaian.me/. Suresh Fernando
chaired the meeting, and Coalition stalwarts Michael Maranda, Chris
Watkins, Mark Roest, and myself kept the discussion moving.

Here are a few of the ideas we discussed:

* After introductions, we reviewed the project brief (http://
www.slideshare.net/sureshf/project-matching-summary040211final-6843146).
We agreed that while this document provides an excellent starting
point for the project, it is important that we maintain the 'openness'
of the project, in order to solicit new perspectives and
contributions. The project team will strive to maintain principles of
open culture, revolving the facilitation at team meets and encouraging
the emergent leadership of project initiatives. The upshot is that
just because you missed the first meeting (or even the second, third,
or fourth meetings), you shouldn't feel that everything has been
decided and that your contribution is unnecessary. Sure, we are making
decisions as we go, and some of these decisions will need to be set in
stone to serve as a foundation for what follows. But a project like
this evolves with each iteration, and we will need new talents and
skill-sets to help us tackle every new phase of evolution. In short:
we need you. Please feel welcome to join our next meeting on Feb 20 at
2pm EST. Notify myself. Michael, or Suresh if you are keen.

* One important question that came up is: what kinds of entities are
we planning to gathering meta-data on? Ideally, the Project Matching
system will incorporate differentiated information on projects,
organizations, and individuals. Bowo from WiserEarth has noted that
there can be problems authenticating 'official' projects when
gathering data on organizations. We could avoid this by restricting
our data collection to climate action and transition projects, as
opposed to soliciting data from organizations per se. Even so, we will
need to approach organizations in our outreach, and we need to be
aware of culture of the organizations that we approach. We don't want
to step on any oversized organizational toes at any point in the
Project Matching process.

* Michael pointed out that, while the 'dating' analogy is great from a
communications perspective, we are not really building a 'dating'
site. There are some important differences between the proposed system
and a dating site. First, there will be multiple matches between
projects, and project representatives will no doubt pursue multiple
matches, not their 'one true love' (this led Chris to quip: 'so we're
promoting polygamy?'). Second, participants may identify as persons,
projects, and/or organizations. The system will need to deal with a
level of ontological ambiguity to process this. Third, we will need to
broker the matchmaking activity in some way, initially at least. This
is unlike a dating site, where people broker relationships
themselves.

* The algorithm that we use to process meta-data is vital. We will be
building it from scratch. Chris suggested that we start checking out
dating sites for ideas. Apparently the dating site OkCupid (http://
okcupid.com/) has a good matching system and is worth checking out. I
would recommend that anyone doing this signal the fact with their
partner in advance!

* Suresh is talking to the organizers of the Contact conference in NYC
(http://contactcon.com/about), who are interested in a session on the
Project Matching system. This looks set to be an amazing event. It
looks like at least some of the team will definitely be there. It
gives us a date to aim at (October 20), and a good opportunity to meet
each other in person, if you can make it.

* We finished up by volunteering for the work-groups that we are
establishing for the project: tech/platform, data/algorithm, and
outreach. If you are interested in helping out in one or more of these
areas, please do let us know!

One final thought: we need a hot name for this system. 'Project
Matching System' accurately describes of what we are seeking to build.
Unfortunately, though, it reduces to the acronym PMS, and PMS is not
conducive to happy dating! If you have any suggestions, please do pass
them on.

Hope to speak to you on Feb 20. We'll be discussing what we've
achieved in our first week of collaboration and laying out paths for
moving the project forward!

Tim

-----------------------------------

PS. We've inaugurated a google-group mailing list:
http://groups.google.com/group/*cc-pms*<https://groups.google.com/group/cc-pms?hl=en>

We've also started the team wiki page at: http://cotw.cc/wiki/Project_Matching

and a BetterMeans workstream at: https://secure.bettermeans.com/projects/184

On Feb 14, 8:38 am, Michael Maranda <tropol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> We've just concluded our first open meeting of the Climate Change - Project
> Matching System (CC-PMS) working group!
>
> We've inaugurated a google-group mailing list - please join if interested,
> and spread the word!  
>

> http://groups.google.com/group/*cc-pms*<https://groups.google.com/group/cc-pms?hl=en>
>
> We've also started the team wiki page athttp://cotw.cc/wiki/Project_Matching
>
> And we have a BetterMeans workstream athttps://secure.bettermeans.com/projects/184

>
> We also have a skype chat channel for the cc-pms (or for the cotw ingeneral)
> -- let us know if you want to be added!
>
> If you need any help with the wiki or bettermeans.com or anything else, just
> ask!
>
> Next meeting: one week away  (Feb 20)!  Sign up for  one or more of the
> tracks:  <Tech>, <Data> & <Outreach>!
>
> Regards,
>
> MM
>
> PS    Agenda from first meeting:  http://etherpad.openstewardship.net/PMS-agenda
>

> PPS Link to the proposal document:  http://www.slideshare.net/sureshf/project-matching-summary040211final...

[Marcos]

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 2:57 PM, timrayner <trc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello everyone!
> Here are some notes on the first meeting of the Climate Change Project
> Matching group, which kicked off yesterday at 2pm US EST on Skype.
> They are part roundup, part my own tenuous reflections on the topics
> under discussion. I compiled them from the Skype chat feed, into which
> people deposited key propositions and ideas under discussion. Many
> good points were made in the voice chat that were not typed down -

> apologies for what I've missed. [...]

Awesome guys. Sorry couldn't be there. Don't have video, or mic
setup. But looks like some progress made.

Thanks for the notes!

marcos
pangaia.sourceforge.net

[paul horan]

Tim AND All,

Thanks much for this round up, Tim = feel like I almost participated yesterday AND now look forward to participating actually live w/ y'all this Sunday.

"Outreach" seems the most suitable focal point for my volunteer efforts at least for starters, so kindly sign me up! I'm also aiming to synchronize with folks teaming up via "tech/platform, data/algorithm"* and any other essential CotW functions likely to emerge.

Not sure if "Love Boat Streams" qualifies as a "hot name"; nonetheless, inviting dating game participants to enjoy one another's company by going for a ride in a "Love Boat" on a "Stream" of super clear signals ... strikes me as a FUN date. 

Appreciatively,

paul

* P. S. = Big Fat "Tip o' the Hat" to all you good folks collaborating via our 'tech & algorithm' streams = I have virtually no idea how to do what you do AND I'm so glad you real live folks I'm getting to know are actually doing it. With respect for work related to 'platform' design streams, does biomimicry seem like an attractive influence at all? And if 'data' streams are at all related to systems epistemologies (some say that's redundant) then let's converse further when we can find the time cause now I've gotta go back to work on articulating my "outreach" statement/image in time for this Sunday's powwow ...

[Mark Roest]

Hello Tim and all,

How about Climate Allies Matching System (CAMS)?

As my mind is sticking like glue to the necessity of including GPS coordinates in the identities that are tracked, I am also getting some specifics:
- The actual location of organizations and their branches, and field operations if any
- While offices may have a specific point reference, everything else is likely to be a polygon, and to include gradients (if observers are paying attention). This can be handled by gradient scales in a GIS.
What if the boundaries and gradients are in flux over time? GIS systems are now being used to show time-series changes, from digitized historical maps through modern digital recordkeeping and into the future. This is particularly relevant for climate change, and for its impacts, and for large-scale human-induced disaster events that exacerbate its impacts, such as the oil industry's major spills in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico, the fires of the Iraq war, and the forest fires in Indonesia a several years ago.
Another gradient scale that is important is an organization's sphere of influence. Displaying this can make it possible to coordinate strategically, without stepping on each others' toes. Areas of low-level influence by two or more organizations seeking to coordinate operations can be allocated administratively, or better, by informed choice of the populations served.

Technically, we may want to consider using fuzzy logic in the gradient math (I do not know whether that is already standard operating procedure or not). Where data is questionable, Bayesian logic is valuable.

One of the MOST IMPORTANT reasons for using GIS is its ability to take us seamlessly from a display of technical data to (thanks to digital earth imaging) images that grab us at our roots and hold our deepest attention as beings. This is one of our strongest tools, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has an education department that has been doing a great job of experimenting, researching, and teaching how to use these tools. While this may not immediately have a direct impact on project matching per se, it is a compelling reason to make GIS our default mode of operation / operating platform.

The question probably has come up almost instantly in most of the minds reading this, can a GIS handle all of the things we want to do that are not, on their face, geographical in nature? So now, I once again pass the ball to Tim Foresman, a GIS pioneer who recently started working with ESRI, the industry leader in GIS, and may be ready to take it and run with it.
1. Tim, just what has ESRI come up with that has them so excited?
2. What are its implications, as you see them, for building a social movement to use Open Stewardship to guide our response to global climate change?
3. Are the databases built into leading GIS systems robust enough to handle hundreds (soon) to tens of thousands (hopefully in a year or two) of organizations using them to find partners for projects, and to locate the nearest, highest quality, lowest cost, human and other kinds of resources, from other organizations?
4. Finally, in the best of all possible sets of circumstances, what kinds of possibilities do you see opening up for creative transformation as a result of the technical development that has occurred so far, of planned further improvements, and of the directions that are reasonably possible in the future?

Regards,

Mark

On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 1:57 PM, timrayner <trc...@gmail.com> wrote:

--
------------------
Coalition of the Willing
------------------
The Coalition occupies several spaces for communication and action.  Keep the discussion on this list civil & assume good faith.  Strive for brevity.

For the what-why-where of Coalition work, look to http://cotw.cc.   That wiki functions as a routing-portal and a locus for some of the work. All group efforts should maintain an updated statement of current focus, channels and spaces of work and anything necessary to support orientation & keeping up-to-speed.

"BetterMeans" is where we coordinate our work: making proposals, endorsing & signing up for work, and tracking tasks. https://secure.bettermeans.com/projects/163
-----------------
You are subscribed to coal...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe send email to coalition+...@googlegroups.com
For more options http://groups.google.com/group/coalition?hl=en

[Tim Rayner]

Hi Venessa,

The issue of precisely what kinds of organizations we intend to match is still under discussion. I'll offer some reflections based on my own thinking. What I say here is informed by the 'swarm theory' outlined in Coalition of the Willing (the film) and subsequently developed in conjunction with the CotW group. I'm keen to see what the members of the CC-PMS group think of these ideas, as this is the first time I've presented them in any detail.

My view is that our focus should be less on linking organizations than on facilitating matches between volunteers who may or may not identify with organizations. Green goodwill is traditionally aggregated about large NFP movements. Organizations seek to clearly stipulate the kinds of projects that they run so that people can affiliate with them. They also tend to target their projects at the national or international levels, which means that they wind up focusing on petitioning or otherwise pressuring elected representatives to make the changes that their base would like to see in the world. What comes out of this is a situation where the major players in the realm of green activism are concerned with leading large scale projects to effect top down political change.

I don't think that there is much point in us trying to engage major environmental movements and organizations in our project matching enterprise. Because of the scale of their projects, and the way that they approach their movement-building activity, they are unlikely to be open to trans-movement 'dating'.

I see us targeting, first and foremost, the emerging realm of informal activism. Check out this excellent article published in MetaActivism on Jumo: http://www.meta-activism.org/2010/12/jumo-who-needs-whom/. The author writes:

'One way to look at Jumo is as the Facebook to Idealist and VolunteerMatch�s MySpace and Friendster, offering an aesthetic and usability update (and also a threat).� But the more significant update is how Jumo defines what it means to be a change-making organization. The gatekeepers of tax status and government authorization are no longer a necessity. In the digital age of low-cost access and instant organizations, social change is an open door, and at Jumo anyone is free to step through and give it a shot'.

Personally, I think this analysis overstates the extent to which Jumo facilitates informal activism. Facebook enables informal activism to a similar extent, which is not very much. But the broader point is valid. In the digital age of low-cost access and instant organizations, people don't need to engage the major NFPs to take action. Indeed, if they are primarily concerned about local transformations, they are arguably better off not going this way (unless the NFP is set up to faciliate local actions). They are better to use green networking services like http://www.wiserearth.org/, http://oneworldgroup.org/oneclimate, http://www.climatehealers.org/,� http://www.transitionnetwork.org/ or http://transitioninaction.com/.

My sense is that the CC-PMS should primarily target individuals, groups, and organizations using these sorts of networks. Our strategy would be to work with these kinds of networks for the sake of the individuals, groups, and organizations using them. Instead of seeking to link organizations, we'd seek to facilitate a project-based meta-network made up of formal and informal activist groups. Instead of seeking to define a specific cause that would unite a set of organizations, we'd draw on the diversity of concerns that people have about climate change and sustainable transition, and use the system to focus these concerns into multiple swarm initiatives.

As I say, we are yet to collectively sign off on our outreach strategy, so please don't take this as the final word. I hope it at least gives you a sense of the kind of strategy we are developing here, and the kinds of organizations we'll be working with.

Tim



On 16/02/2011 10:52 AM, Venessa Miemis wrote:

thanks for response, but i meant specifically what kinds of projects.
"climate change" is a broad/vague concept.. just wondered if you had
any concrete examples of organizations you would try to link.

On Feb 15, 6:48�pm, Suresh Fernando <suresh2...@gmail.com> wrote:

Venessa,

Also the idea is that certain projects are more likely to be willing and/or
able to collaborate with each other. These are projects that are a part of
the same ecosystem <http://docs.google.com/View?id=dc4gbgsj_1480ns63fcdp>

Climate change, broadly construed, is an ecosystem.

This is also the basis for the strategic fit with the Coalition of the
Willing Project <http://cotw.cc/wiki/Coalition_of_the_Willing>.

Hope this makes things clearer.

Suresh









On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Tim Rayner <t...@timrayner.net> wrote:

Hi Venessa,

Climate action and transition projects, broadly construed, developed by
individuals, groups, and organizations.

Tim

On 16/02/2011 12:11 AM, Venessa Miemis wrote:

just curious, but what kinds of projects are you trying to match via
this initiative?

On Feb 14, 4:57 pm, timrayner<trc...@gmail.com> �wrote:

Hello everyone!

Here are some notes on the first meeting of the Climate Change Project
Matching group, which kicked off yesterday at 2pm US EST on Skype.
They are part roundup, part my own tenuous reflections on the topics
under discussion. I compiled them from the Skype chat feed, into which
people deposited key propositions and ideas under discussion. Many
good points were made in the voice chat that were not typed down -
apologies for what I've missed.

First of all, thanks to everyone who participated in this first
meeting of a very exciting project group. There was a great spread of
people, all of whom brought valuable perspectives to the discussion.
Participants included Pamela McLean (http://dadamac.posterous.com),
who expressed an interest in engaging people in rural African
environments in the CCPM system; Randy Fisher, who brings his
background in Open Education Resources (http://wikieducator,

http://oerfoundation.org);TiberiusBrastaviceanu, founder of the spot-
on swarm-theoretical Multitude Project (https://sites.google.com/site/

multitude2008/); and Marius Bauer, founder of the brilliant
collaborative art project Gaia 10 (http://www.gaia10.us/blog/calling

-
all-gaians/) and soon-to-be launchedhttp://gaian.me/. Suresh Fernando
chaired the meeting, and Coalition stalwarts Michael Maranda, Chris
Watkins, Mark Roest, and myself kept the discussion moving.

Here are a few of the ideas we discussed:

* After introductions, we reviewed the project brief (

http://www.slideshare.net/sureshf/project-matching-summary040211final...
).
We agreed that while this document provides an excellent starting
point for the project, it is important that we maintain the 'openness'
of the project, in order to solicit new perspectives and
contributions. The project team will strive to maintain principles of
open culture, revolving the facilitation at team meets and encouraging
the emergent leadership of project initiatives. The upshot is that
just because you missed the first meeting (or even the second, third,
or fourth meetings), you shouldn't feel that everything has been
decided and that your contribution is unnecessary. Sure, we are making
decisions as we go, and some of these decisions will need to be set in
stone to serve as a foundation for what follows. But a project like
this evolves with each iteration, and we will need new talents and
skill-sets to help us tackle every new phase of evolution. In short:
we need you. Please feel welcome to join our next meeting on Feb 20 at
2pm EST. Notify myself. Michael, or Suresh if you are keen.

On Feb 14, 8:38 am, Michael Maranda<tropol...@gmail.com> �wrote:

�We've just concluded our first open meeting of the Climate Change -

Project
Matching System (CC-PMS) working group!
We've inaugurated a google-group mailing list - please join if
interested,
and spread the word!
http://groups.google.com/group/*cc-pms*<
https://groups.google.com/group/cc-pms?hl=en>
We've also started the team wiki page athttp://
cotw.cc/wiki/Project_Matching
And we have a BetterMeans workstream athttps://
secure.bettermeans.com/projects/184
We also have a skype chat channel for the cc-pms (or for the cotw
ingeneral)
-- let us know if you want to be added!
If you need any help with the wiki or bettermeans.com

 or anything else,
just
ask!
Next meeting: one week away �(Feb 20)! �Sign up for �one or more of the
tracks:<Tech>,<Data> �& �<Outreach>!
Regards,
MM
PS � �Agenda from first meeting:

http://etherpad.openstewardship.net/PMS-agenda
PPS Link to the proposal document:
http://www.slideshare.net/sureshf/project-matching-summary040211final

.
..
(Although it says final -- everything is fluid! � We want your input!)

--
This is a message from the OpenKollab Google Group located at
http://groups.google.com/group/openkollab?hl=en
To post to this group, send email to openk...@googlegroups.com

--
*Suresh Fernando *
BLOG <http://sureshf.posterous.com/>,
YOUTUBE<http://www.youtube.com/my_videos?feature=mhum>,
OK WEBSITE, <http://openkollab.com>OK FAN PAG
<http://goog_1343289408>E<http://www.facebook.com/openkollab?ref=ts#%21/openkollab>
, OK GROUP <http://groups.google.ca/group/openkollab>,
OK-WE<http://www.wiserearth.org/group/openkollab>,
PHILOSOPHY, �<http://sureshfernando.wordpress.com> TWITTER,
<http://twitter.com/sureshf> FACEBOOK,
<http://facebook.com/suresh.fernando>WOTW FAN
PAGE<http://www.facebook.com/tedxvancouver?v=wall#%21/pages/The-Way-Of-The...>
LINKEDIN<http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=412718&authType=name&authToke...>,
SLIDESHARE <http://www.slideshare.net/sureshf>
*
**'The counter cultural revolution was a rhizomatic meshwork of
loosely-coordinated, loosely-affiliated struggles. The goals of these
struggles weren�t always complimentary, but the struggles were aligned and
together they staged a mass offensive to shatter the status quo'*. - from
The Coalition of the Willing

[paul horan]

Tim,

I liked that "MetaActivism on Jumo" post & the comments even more.

Thanks,

paul

On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Tim Rayner <t...@timrayner.net> wrote:

Hi Venessa,

The issue of precisely what kinds of organizations we intend to match is still under discussion. I'll offer some reflections based on my own thinking. What I say here is informed by the 'swarm theory' outlined in Coalition of the Willing (the film) and subsequently developed in conjunction with the CotW group. I'm keen to see what the members of the CC-PMS group think of these ideas, as this is the first time I've presented them in any detail.

My view is that our focus should be less on linking organizations than on facilitating matches between volunteers who may or may not identify with organizations. Green goodwill is traditionally aggregated about large NFP movements. Organizations seek to clearly stipulate the kinds of projects that they run so that people can affiliate with them. They also tend to target their projects at the national or international levels, which means that they wind up focusing on petitioning or otherwise pressuring elected representatives to make the changes that their base would like to see in the world. What comes out of this is a situation where the major players in the realm of green activism are concerned with leading large scale projects to effect top down political change.

I don't think that there is much point in us trying to engage major environmental movements and organizations in our project matching enterprise. Because of the scale of their projects, and the way that they approach their movement-building activity, they are unlikely to be open to trans-movement 'dating'.

I see us targeting, first and foremost, the emerging realm of informal activism. Check out this excellent article published in MetaActivism on Jumo: http://www.meta-activism.org/2010/12/jumo-who-needs-whom/. The author writes:

'One way to look at Jumo is as the Facebook to Idealist and VolunteerMatch‘s MySpace and Friendster, offering an aesthetic and usability update (and also a threat).  But the more significant update is how Jumo defines what it means to be a change-making organization. The gatekeepers of tax status and government authorization are no longer a necessity. In the digital age of low-cost access and instant organizations, social change is an open door, and at Jumo anyone is free to step through and give it a shot'.

Personally, I think this analysis overstates the extent to which Jumo facilitates informal activism. Facebook enables informal activism to a similar extent, which is not very much. But the broader point is valid. In the digital age of low-cost access and instant organizations, people don't need to engage the major NFPs to take action. Indeed, if they are primarily concerned about local transformations, they are arguably better off not going this way (unless the NFP is set up to faciliate local actions). They are better to use green networking services like http://www.wiserearth.org/, http://oneworldgroup.org/oneclimate, http://www.climatehealers.org/,  http://www.transitionnetwork.org/ or http://transitioninaction.com/.

My sense is that the CC-PMS should primarily target individuals, groups, and organizations using these sorts of networks. Our strategy would be to work with these kinds of networks for the sake of the individuals, groups, and organizations using them. Instead of seeking to link organizations, we'd seek to facilitate a project-based meta-network made up of formal and informal activist groups. Instead of seeking to define a specific cause that would unite a set of organizations, we'd draw on the diversity of concerns that people have about climate change and sustainable transition, and use the system to focus these concerns into multiple swarm initiatives.

As I say, we are yet to collectively sign off on our outreach strategy, so please don't take this as the final word. I hope it at least gives you a sense of the kind of strategy we are developing here, and the kinds of organizations we'll be working with.

Tim



On 16/02/2011 10:52 AM, Venessa Miemis wrote:

thanks for response, but i meant specifically what kinds of projects.
"climate change" is a broad/vague concept.. just wondered if you had
any concrete examples of organizations you would try to link.

On Feb 15, 6:48 pm, Suresh Fernando <suresh2...@gmail.com> wrote:

Venessa,

Also the idea is that certain projects are more likely to be willing and/or
able to collaborate with each other. These are projects that are a part of
the same ecosystem <http://docs.google.com/View?id=dc4gbgsj_1480ns63fcdp>

Climate change, broadly construed, is an ecosystem.

This is also the basis for the strategic fit with the Coalition of the
Willing Project <http://cotw.cc/wiki/Coalition_of_the_Willing>.

Hope this makes things clearer.

Suresh









On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Tim Rayner <t...@timrayner.net> wrote:

Hi Venessa,

Climate action and transition projects, broadly construed, developed by
individuals, groups, and organizations.

Tim

On 16/02/2011 12:11 AM, Venessa Miemis wrote:

just curious, but what kinds of projects are you trying to match via
this initiative?

On Feb 14, 4:57 pm, timrayner<trc...@gmail.com>  wrote:

On Feb 14, 8:38 am, Michael Maranda<tropol...@gmail.com>  wrote:

 We've just concluded our first open meeting of the Climate Change -

Project
Matching System (CC-PMS) working group!
We've inaugurated a google-group mailing list - please join if
interested,
and spread the word!
http://groups.google.com/group/*cc-pms*<
https://groups.google.com/group/cc-pms?hl=en>
We've also started the team wiki page athttp://
cotw.cc/wiki/Project_Matching
And we have a BetterMeans workstream athttps://
secure.bettermeans.com/projects/184
We also have a skype chat channel for the cc-pms (or for the cotw
ingeneral)
-- let us know if you want to be added!
If you need any help with the wiki or bettermeans.com

 or anything else,
just
ask!
Next meeting: one week away  (Feb 20)!  Sign up for  one or more of the
tracks:<Tech>,<Data>  &  <Outreach>!
Regards,
MM
PS    Agenda from first meeting:

http://etherpad.openstewardship.net/PMS-agenda
PPS Link to the proposal document:
http://www.slideshare.net/sureshf/project-matching-summary040211final

.
..
(Although it says final -- everything is fluid!   We want your input!)

--
This is a message from the OpenKollab Google Group located at
http://groups.google.com/group/openkollab?hl=en
To post to this group, send email to openk...@googlegroups.com

--
*Suresh Fernando *
BLOG <http://sureshf.posterous.com/>,
YOUTUBE<http://www.youtube.com/my_videos?feature=mhum>,
OK WEBSITE, <http://openkollab.com>OK FAN PAG
<http://goog_1343289408>E<http://www.facebook.com/openkollab?ref=ts#%21/openkollab>
, OK GROUP <http://groups.google.ca/group/openkollab>,
OK-WE<http://www.wiserearth.org/group/openkollab>

,
PHILOSOPHY,  <http://sureshfernando.wordpress.com> TWITTER,

<http://twitter.com/sureshf> FACEBOOK,
<http://facebook.com/suresh.fernando>WOTW FAN
PAGE<http://www.facebook.com/tedxvancouver?v=wall#%21/pages/The-Way-Of-The...>
LINKEDIN<http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=412718&authType=name&authToke...>,
SLIDESHARE <http://www.slideshare.net/sureshf>

*
**'The counter cultural revolution was a rhizomatic meshwork of
loosely-coordinated, loosely-affiliated struggles. The goals of these
struggles weren’t always complimentary, but the struggles were aligned and
together they staged a mass offensive to shatter the status quo'*. - from
The Coalition of the Willing