[okfn-discuss] Open Knowledge Foundation Strategy slides

[Gene Shackman]

"About point 3, what is the problem with advertisement?"
 
Well, as another person posted, a lot of this presentation is already about okfn. Since the slide show is supposed to be about the strategic plan, there should be more on that. Also, a lot of the terms used in slide 10, well, other organizations could say those terms apply to them too. So perhaps, slide 10 isn't really needed. 

"not fanatic". Well, it's more positive to demonstrate by doing. I'm sure okfn is not fanatic, so get people to work with you, and find out. You can also show that okfn is not fanatic, and is collaborative, by listing some projects that you worked together with other organizations, collaborating, acknowledging other's ideas and input, that you listen.


Gene





________________________________
 From: Everton Zanella Alvarenga <everton.alvarenga at okfn.org>
To: Open Knowledge Foundation discussion list <okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org> 
Sent: Sunday, July 21, 2013 11:59 AM
Subject: Re: [okfn-discuss] Open Knowledge Foundation Strategy slides
 

2013/7/20 Gene Shackman <eval_gene at yahoo.com>

> 1. slide 9. I don't know that you need to say "not fanatic". Just "pragmatic" is good enough. Are you saying someone else -is- fanatic?
>
> 2. slides 7 and 9. You do define 'talking' as advocacy on slide 7, but when I got to slide 9, I'm sorry to say I didn't really remember seeing the previous definition, so all I saw on slide 9 was "talking", which doesn't sound very useful. Can you change that to "advocacy and creating"? That's immediately understandable, and looks like you are -doing- something.
>
> 3. Slide 10. Now that I've been on this list a little while, I see there are many organizations about 'open'. Slide 10 seems kind of like an advertisement, why okf is better than other organizations. No real harm in it, but just seems kind of marketing.

On point 1, maybe saying we are "not fanatic" is not the best way to
communicate, but I must tell this really help to bring people to OKF
activities and projects. Yesterday I just had a live experience while
talking to a journalist that liked very much OKF way of work. Just to
mention one example, I told him about a poster [1] some volunteers
made using a proprietary tool for an OKF event in São Paulo, and when
I asked some help to some minor edits before printing, I was mocked,
with some people saying it would be better to be done by hand and even
not having any posters at all (and all this discussion was made on
Facebook, haha, what contradiction). I know that is just one single
example, but yes, I think there are lots of fanatics. And fanatics
more keep people away than raise awareness about the importance of
knowledge being open in a broad sense.

About point 3, what is the problem with advertisement? If the OKF
community thinks it does original, good and important works, why not
trying to tell this to bring more people who share similar values?

What I think is missing from these slides are two things I like very
much of OKF values. One is about decentralized collaboration. "In
particular, a primary aim is to help others develop open material as
well as creating it ourselves. We believe that the future lies in
collaboration between a multitude of different groups and that no one
group or organisation can, or should try to, “do it all”. It is when
we work together that we are the strongest." [2]

The other thing I think is missing is to mention meritocracy. I am
from a culture where it is bad to mention it, to value those who do
better and people don't like to be assessed, which tends to a
mediocrity state in several sectors of my country. Even in some top
universities, where I've learned with the best professors I had on the
importance of meritocracy, I believe we are far to achieve that.

The last point of slide 10 mentions "community governance" and several
times I read this "open discussion" on OKF pages and presentations. We
are far from this. And I am not saying this is totaly bad, since
several times we need to be more doocratic [3] than democratic to have
*things done*. But obviously as OKF expands, it is important to hear
the local communities, and in this sense of community governance I
think it is doing well.

The presentation is good.

P. S. I share others concerns about using too much some proprietary
tools and services. If all staff is aware of this problem and thinking
on ways to solve that in the mid to long term, that is fine, whilst we
have to have the work done. But I know examples where professionals
contradicts the organization values and there is a great risk to
become only a fashion organization as it grows.

Tom

[1] Isn't fancy?
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cartaz_Ci%C3%AAncia_Aberta.pdf
I could not do better.

[2] http://okfn.org/about/

[3] http://www.communitywiki.org/DoOcracy

--
Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom)
OKF Brasil - Rede pelo Conhecimento Livre
http://br.okfn.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/attachments/20130721/ac6ef90e/attachment.html>