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

[Aaron Wolf]

I could imagine a thing with like some animated pull-down menu option some
gimmicky thing…

I mean, if it were clear that this tagline was some thing here and there,
like in the multiple tag-line approach, that'd be different. But if it is
boldly "the" tagline, there's no way that artists would feel included or
invited on first impression.

--
Aaron Wolf
wolftune.com


On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:29 AM, heath rezabek <heath.rezabek at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/attachments/20140616/c5b8e126/attachment-0002.html>