[od-discuss] [okfn-discuss] Open Definition 2.0?

Tue Oct 7 14:30:57 UTC 2014

On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 7:04 AM, Rufus Pollock <rufus.pollock at okfn.org>
wrote:

> I think folks had assumed that interested parties would be on the
> od-discuss list or read the announcements on the open definition blog.

I think it just seems odd to me this conflation of "folks interested in
participating in the drafting process" with "folks interested in seeing and
commenting on a proposed final draft". This isn't about making anyone feel
bad. We can go ahead and admit that folks did not do their best and still
acknowledge all the great work. The point is to learn lessons and improve
going forward.

If I seem frustrated, it's because lessons *should* have been learned from
the roll-out of the tagline. Given that history, folks who felt ok posting
the final announcement to the list without posting a final-draft-candidate
first did *not do their best*. I wouldn't try to emphasize that if it
weren't asserted otherwise.

We need a general cultural standard that we always consider
final-release-candidate announcements and not skip that in favor of jumping
to final-release. And things that emphasize how great the process was in
response to this concern seem to be efforts to downplay this. I didn't want
a long thread, I just want others to say, "yeah, that's what we should have
done and should do in the future".

Respectfully,
Aaron

--
Aaron Wolf
wolftune.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/od-discuss/attachments/20141007/303f2ed0/attachment-0003.html>