[okfn-discuss] Next steps on the Open Knowledge Tagline

Sat Jun 14 16:33:32 UTC 2014

Multiple taglines, adapted as needs change, has a definite appeal.  I think
that if the simple phrase 'Open Knowledge' weren't so expansive, it'd be a
lot harder to live with the idea of multiple taglines.

The potential community is definitely quite vast, in part because of the
flexibility of that phrase as a draw.  While I was in San Francisco
recently for the Long Now space opening, I got a behind the scenes look at
the Internet Archive.  I was musing on the fact that their mission tagline
is "Universal access to all knowledge."  Well, that could just as easily be
an OK motto, as its scope is so vast.  But it's taken.  ;)

The point is that by virtue of setting out on such a far-reaching journey,
(Open Knowledge), we are bound to find ourselves companions on the road
with a wide range of fellow travellers.  Sometimes it'll surprise us
(though it shouldn't) that we're on the same road.  But all kinds of things
turn out to be necessary aspects of a movement towards open knowledge.
 (Trust and privacy, net neutrality, openness as a choice freely taken
rather than a forced mandate, etc.)

In every encounter, we have to speak clearly and stand proudly for what we
hold true.  The real purpose of any tagline in that moment should simply be
to identify our common cause, and to open a dialogue.

MLK wrote, in a telegraph to Cesar Chavez in jail:  "Our separate struggles
are really one."

Until we can achieve such clarity, I think we should embrace the strength
of our name as it stands, and then seek out those words of clear dialogue
as the opportunities arise.

So yes, multiple taglines do not necessarily have to equate with
indecision.  There's just a lot to decide, together, over time.

- Heath

On Saturday, June 14, 2014, Aaron Wolf <wolftune at gmail.com> wrote:

> While everyone has their opinions, if the tag-line that had been
> originally chosen without so much input had been an actual call-to-action,
> something actually decent, people might not have bothered complaining.
>
> I think "see how data can change the world" is clearly *disliked* by lots
> (perhaps most) of us, the thing I've found most troubling is that it wasn't
> scrapped.
>
> I have some experience with this sort of process, and I can tell you this:
> it is extremely hard to find something everyone likes. The goal needs to
> instead be to find something that *nobody* hates (and hopefully most
> people like). The only reason "see how data can change the world" seems to
> have been included in the running is because it was already there and some
> people had early prejudice for it. Whether we end up with a main tagline or
> 3-5 or whatever, "see how" needs to be *omitted.* It's been pointed out
> by multiple people how passive, distancing, topic-centric, and unclear it
> is. It doesn't qualify for "nobody hates it" status even if we hesitate to
> use the word "hate".
>
> We can go through the rest and figure out if any options nobody hates.
> Those are the ones we can move forward with. And I'm not saying just give
> in to haters, but when reasonable people express things that aren't "it's
> too fluffy, or it's too chunky" but really express true dislike with
> explanations and persistence, *then* we *need* to drop the item in
> question.
>
> Respectfully,
> Aaron
>
> --
> Aaron Wolf
> wolftune.com
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 6:28 AM, Laura James <laura.james at okfn.org
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','laura.james at okfn.org');>> wrote:
>
>> Hi Daniela,
>>
>> On 14 June 2014 12:43, Daniela Mattern <daniela.mattern at okfn.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','daniela.mattern at okfn.org');>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> So, my suggestion is: Why can't we just have a set of taglines (3-5)
>>> that we endorse as Open Knowledge and people can select the one, they most
>>> identify with.
>>>
>>
>> *Personally* I think that's a great idea; it allows folks to pick the
>> phrase they feel most strongly about, and/or that they think will work best
>> for the audience they have. In fact, that's sort of what is happening at
>> the moment :) folks are using different phrases, as they need to (in email
>> signatures, T shirts, etc). To make this work well we'd need to have an
>> agreed shortlist which people can easily find to select phrases from, and
>> potentially as Heath suggested, modify those phrases if appropriate too (eg
>> for those working in a specific country or topic).
>>
>> One of the big learnings for me in the first half of this year has been
>> that the open knowledge community is *even more* diverse than I had
>> understood before. Of course, with the range of local and working groups
>> and activities and projects, it's been clear for years that there was a
>> wide range of things, but the evident challenge in coming up with a short
>> shared statement has really highlighted this even more. I had thought that
>> with input from the community survey, a series of interviews and workshops,
>> and some skilled synthesis, we could have come up with a single phrase of
>> words about open knowledge that would work 'well enough' for most folks,
>> and I was wrong.
>>
>> I feel that at this point, we should perhaps park the idea of a single
>> tagline, and instead as you suggest agree a short list of lines for people
>> to choose from. Folks could decide within their own groups/organisations if
>> they, as a group want to stick to just one or two of those lines, or use
>> the full range. For instance, a Chapter might pick a single phrase which
>> works well for their work and local community.
>>
>> The exploration of what beliefs and vision we all share will be easier
>> and richer in the context of longer texts than a tagline. I'm hopeful that
>> the manifesto idea might be one part of that :)
>>
>> In order to find these we should have a list of suggestions and then a
>>> voting process - probably multiple rounds of voting. OKF Finland has a lot
>>> of experience on how to organize group decision making, so maybe Joonas or
>>> Jaakko can help. Before this, we should encourage people to contribute with
>>> suggestions - not only on this list, but have an at least one month process
>>> after which Working Groups, Chapters, Local Groups, and individuals come up
>>> with an idea.
>>>
>>
>> I should note that the working-group and local-group coordination lists
>> were asked to contribute ideas etc on the tagline page on the wiki quite a
>> few weeks ago now, so I hope we've gathered their input a bit; but I don't
>> think that Rufus's email at the start of the thread went out to them yet,
>> so we should make sure that we include these key lists in whatever is
>> happening now/next.
>>
>> Laura
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> okfn-discuss mailing list
>> okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org');>
>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-discuss
>>
>>
>

-- 
Heath Rezabek  //  labs.vessel.cc
Icarus Interstellar  /  FarMaker Design Corps  //  icarusinterstellar.org
Open Knowledge Foundation  /  Texas Ambassador for the OKFn  //  okfn.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/attachments/20140614/b782c900/attachment-0002.html>