[open-science] Planet Open Science

Wed Oct 15 21:57:17 UTC 2014

Hello All

Just to let you know that this conversation has moved to a planning pad
where we can select a good tool for the job. Svetlana has linked to a
debategraph about the topic there and we have a list of all those suggested
in this thread where people can add their comments.
I'll be on the OKF IRC channel most of tomorrow 09:00-18:30 BST if anyone
wants to chat and play about. We could aim for a more concerted sprint to
play with different tools on Saturday if people are interested.

Pad: https://pad.riseup.net/p/ok-meta-community
IRC: irc.freenode.org: #okfn (can join directly via webchat
http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=okfn )

Jenny

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 4:27 PM, Jack Park <jackpark at gmail.com> wrote:

> Peter raises a very important issue. I would like to address that issue by
> offering a kind of "voucher" on behalf of Dr. David A. Price and Peter
> Baldwin, the two fellows who co-created and run DebateGraph all by
> themselves.
>
> We are all being conditioned by social network platforms to believe that
> we are happy campers, playing in sandboxes brought to us through the
> kindness of others.  But, it's really not like that, and Peter appears to
> be looking for evidence of such a charade in the terms and conditions
> offered at DebateGraph.  I'd like to respond to that.
>
> There is no free lunch. Nowhere. So, the question really is this: how do
> you want to pay for your free lunch?  Users of Facebook, Google, LinkedIn,
> Twitter, and damn near every other emerging social network platform are
> paying in this sense: we are not users, we are products being sold to
> others; someone has to pay the light bills and salaries. We do it
> indirectly.
>
> I wish to offer a personal certification that DebateGraph is not like
> that. Sure, it's free. But, as they clearly state on their site: they make
> a living doing training and selling services. The issue for us is this: can
> we trust them and take them at that word, or do we expect to see some exit
> strategy emerge where, like freebase.com, they will eventually sell out
> to the highest bidder?
>
> That's the point to which I speak. I can only tell you what I believe, and
> why.
>
> I spent two glorious, bouncy days sitting in the back of a rickety old bus
> on a ride from Zagreb to Dubrovnik, traveling through Mostar, all that time
> talking with David Price, mostly about business models and structured
> conversations.  I'd like to think that I have a pretty fair insight into
> his aspirations for DebateGraph. But, that all started in 2007 when I was
> in Milton Keynes signing up to write a thesis at Open U, my thesis topic
> being about how to make conversations on the web better. David Price
> dropped in for lunch one day while I was there. I had already signed up for
> DebateGraph (it was nowhere near as powerful then as it is today) since
> engaging with Simon Buckingham Shum at Open U, and Jeff Conklin, got me a
> link to debategraph.org; signing up was the easiest thing I had ever
> done. At that lunch, I quickly realized that David was way out in front of
> me in thinking through social intercourse on the web.
>
> So, back to aspirations: please consider
> http://debategraph.org/amanpourcnn
> That is a pro bono map created by David Price since he clearly believes
> that Christiane Amanpour's interviews with world leaders were worthy of
> capture and structure, leaving open the door to "continuing the
> conversation".
>
> See, David and I orbit the space which attracts those who believe that
> conversation is necessary, but not sufficient in solving global issues, as
> well as doing science. So, if conversation is crucial, how can we do it
> better? My thesis proposal, found here:
> http://kmi.open.ac.uk/publications/techreport/kmi-10-01
> speaks to many, but not all of the issues.
>
> DebateGraph addresses many of those issues. Yes, it is free. No, I do not
> believe there is a hidden agenda based on some exit strategy; David and
> Peter both come from backgrounds which inform their actions, ones for which
> goals of improved global communication are entailed.
>
> You might wonder this: can I get my data back?
> I too wondered that. So, I started a conversation with David, which led to
> receiving experimental dumps of one of my graphs to explore ways of
> exporting.  I have every reason to believe that DebateGraph will soon have
> a full sharing API in place, but I am patient; it is just two guys running
> the show, doing what they think to be important.
>
> None of that is meant to be taken as fact other than the events I
> describe; I am simply stating what I believe.
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> I have read the Terms and Conditions of this site which are heavily
>> weighted in favour of the company and I would not be happy about using it.
>>
>> P.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Peter Murray-Rust
>> Reader in Molecular Informatics
>> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
>> University of Cambridge
>> CB2 1EW, UK
>> +44-1223-763069
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-science mailing list
> open-science at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-science
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-science
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20141015/4ba56de5/attachment.html>