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

[heath rezabek]

Aaron, I also have an open culture focus, and I'd think, "Of course it
does.  It'd be absurd to think not."

It seems to me that all one would need to do is swap out that word 'data'
for your particular event, connection, purpose, moment, etc, to open that
dialogue with whoever you're working with.

"See how art can change the world."

How?  For one, by being open.  And, discuss...

- Heath








On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Aaron Wolf <wolftune at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks, Rufus. I agree. The concern was initially about potential shift in
> focus and concern about inclusion of the community in the decisions.
>
> To be clear, I always thought it was great that lots of Open Data stuff
> was happening, but I saw "Open Knowledge" as basically including "Free
> Culture", and when I think of stuff cultural works like music and art, I
> see *zero* place for that in "See how data can change the world". And I
> think that will remain the case for everyone who ever sees that tagline.
> Nobody will ever see that tagline and think OK has anything directly to do
> with free/open art.
>
> So the initial concern remains: Does "Open Knowledge" include art and
> culture? If "See how data…" is even an option, I still have my doubts.
> Maybe I was wrong all along and OK was *never* inclusive of those things…
> I'm really not honestly sure now.
>
> Respectfully,
> Aaron
>
>
> --
> Aaron Wolf
> wolftune.com
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 2:38 AM, Rufus Pollock <rufus.pollock at okfn.org>
> wrote:
>
>> On 14 June 2014 16:43, 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".
>>>
>>
>> @Aaron: as you point out a lot of people can have different opinions on
>> this topic. I should say, personally, I see a reasonable amount to
>> recommend the "See how ..." approach (as Rob Myers points out below). Once
>> you have "see how" and you can't repeat knowledge (you're going to prefix
>> with that remember!) you end up with a default choice between data and
>> information and given the framing of the tagline within "Open Knowledge:
>> ..." and potentially the narrative I think there is much in "See how data
>> can change the world" - btw I'm not saying there is not much in other
>> options, i'm just trying to explain why I think this was kept in on its
>> merits :-)
>>
>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>
>> I am concerned that some of the original reaction to this *tagline* was
>> an (important and valuable) reaction to deeper and more complex things than
>> the tagline - i.e. a sense there was some change in identity or focus.
>>
>> rufus
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> okfn-discuss mailing list
>> okfn-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-discuss
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> okfn-discuss mailing list
> 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/20140616/c1f859f1/attachment-0002.html>