[okfn-discuss] idea: open knowledge manifesto

Sat Jun 14 05:28:44 UTC 2014

Hello Laura,

Great to hear that the privacy and open data workshop was an inspiring one,
and that an analysis of power was core to the discussions.

I think there is great potential in the development of a Manifesto as a
project to explore the shared vision and diversity across the broad Open
Knowledge Community.

The important thing will not so much be the platform for drafting, as the
process of building a manifesto: how it is made into an inclusive community
process that could strengthen and rebuild community trust, deepening shared
understanding of where there are common, complementary and divergent goals
amongst us all.

So - in response to the specific questions below:

Do you want to have a manifesto?
>

I certainly think trying to develop a manifesto would be a valuable
process. It would be interesting to consider whether this should be
approached in the development as:

- A manifesto for Open Knowledge (the core organisation)
- A manifesto for Open Knowledge affiliated groups
- A manifesto for a broader open knowledge movement, such that many
different organisations could help create and subscribe to it

I think the second two options are likely the stronger options.

> What should it look like?
>

It should be broader than the Open Definition. The Open Definition already
provides a core concept which groups can draw upon - but many of the issues
of power, empowerment and social justice around openness rely on going
beyond a formal definition, to argue for open processes and action to
address inequalities outside the features of an item of content itself, in
order to secure the kind of vision of a world where open empowers.

It should also represent the breadth of fields in which open knowledge can
be applied - from culture and hardware, to governance and development.

One approach might be to invite different thematic groups to start with a
process of developing their own manifestos combining:

 - A vision for openness in their respective fields
 - Specific things that need to change

And then look at synthesising those into an overall (short, 2 page max)
manifesto that represents the richness of open knowledge.

> Which issues should it include?
> Which issues should it not include?
>

Address in the above.

> What's the best platform for collaborative drafting - an etherpad, a
> google document, a github repository, something else?
>

As mentioned, I think process over platform is the best place to focus
right now.

Possible elements of a process might include:

- Providing WGs, local groups and core OK projects with a template for
putting together their own mini-manifestos and giving a 2 - 3 month window
for drafting these; hosting a community call or two about the idea of the
manifesto;

- Encouraging people to independently blog about their vision for an Open
Knowledge manifesto and to tag those posts so they can be aggregated
together;

- Tasking a small group to synthesise all these drafts into a first
proposed text for an open knowledge manifesto (with that group working in
the open through whatever tool best allows tracking of how the various
inputs make it into the final text; and having a couple of public calls
during their discussions)

- Putting the draft out for comment through a tool like Digress.it
(Wordpress plugin for line-by-line commenting) or using Annotator (so that
we're keeping with open tools, as tools like Google Docs are clearly
excluding some members of the community who hold strong views on use of
proprietary platforms).

- Redrafting the final text based on comments - and sending it out for
validation by working groups / community members / etc. and perhaps even
setting a threshold such that it can only be adopted as a core OK manifesto
if 75% of OK affiliated groups endorse it.

I know this isn't a quick-and-easy process (probably needs c. 6 months
start to finish at absolute minimum), and I'm mainly putting it forward as
a straw man proposal for discussion, but it does provide the opportunity
for community engagement that was missed in the rebrand, and for thinking
about how on substantive issues like identity and vision OK can really
empower the community in shaping the vision.

I've set up an etherpad to gather ideas on these questions:
> http://pad.okfn.org/p/manifesto_ideas
>

Replying whilst offline - so sorry for not dropping this direct into the
Etherpad. Feel free to copy there if useful.

Tim

>
> Look forward to hearing from you!
>
> Laura
>
>
> PS - I was so inspired by the workshop.  Sometimes it can seem like the
> privacy folks and open data folks have different views, but we ended up
> concluding many of us in both areas are driven by the same motivation - to
> use information power in the cause of human rights. On the train home, I
> was feeling super excited about this, so I quickly wrote up what was in my
> mind after the workshop here
> <https://docs.google.com/a/okfn.org/document/d/1dxwEV3Qt9S3sbOP7XSnefZ6koOcN7Xj3LGfvpkTuWlQ/edit>.
> If you were at the workshop, thanks for all your contributions - it was a
> great two days! Especial thanks to Mark Lizar and others in the 'power'
> session before lunch yesterday for inspiration and fervour :)
>
>

-- 

w: http://www.timdavies.org.uk | m: 07834 856 303 | twitter: timdavies

Co-director of Practical Participation:
http://www.practicalparticipation.co.uk
--------------------------
Practical Participation Ltd is a registered company in England and Wales -
#5381958.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/attachments/20140614/439146fc/attachment-0002.html>