[wsfii-discuss] ... take the lead

Thu Jun 14 13:26:04 UTC 2007

wsfii first principles?

The focus on the open source development model is of course the driving 
principle of wsfii and its wireless freenets and community network 
progenitors... from open source code to social aspirations, engineering 
prerogative to political philosophy...

Lines can become tangled...

Organisation is needed, leadership can be timely, agreed common objectives 
are fundamental, and strategic agendas are advisable...

The open source label can tend to be bandied about, and confusions arise, 
and even divergent agendas...

It's worth taking time to reflect upon the history and currents of the open 
source movement, and wikipedia is predictaby a useful first port of call: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source

ah, I read here:

"Another criticism of the open source movement is that these projects are 
not really as self-organizing as their proponents claim. This argument holds 
that open source projects succeed only when they have a strong central 
manager, even if that manager is a volunteer. The article Open Source 
Projects Manage Themselves? Dream On. by Chuck Connell explains this 
viewpoint. Eric Raymond responded to this criticism, and Chuck Connell 
answered".

John

>From: "Thomas Maketa" <tmaketa at gmail.com>
>Reply-To: Discuss list on the World Summit on Free Information 
>Infrastructure<wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
>To: "Discuss list on the World Summit on Free Information 
>Infrastructure"<wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org>
>Subject: Re: [wsfii-discuss] ... take the lead
>Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2007 14:39:37 +0200
>
>Ok let's self organize!!!
>But first basic questions to start self organizaing;
>- who has the current ownership of the web site?
>- What is the process for adding new page in a self organizzed way ?
>- If a self organized person inserts in the web information which are
>porographic or un appropriate who is the master self organizing person who
>will reprimand?
>- who will propose the self organized program of the event ?
>
>I think we should balance, let's organize the self-organization, what I'm
>proposing is a first contact person who will be the secretary of the
>self-organized event.
>When someone want to contribute he can lead him in channeling his request.
>When someone self-organize something he can publish it to everybody.
>
>I understand that the term "leader" is not politically correct in open
>source , but we need "SOMEONE" who can coordinate the self organization,
>suggest what can be done , as I have read below.
>And we need that person URGENTLY, maybee he already exists and I dont know,
>if so my apologies.
>
>Till now I dont know who has the responsibility to set the final date, who
>has the physical responsibility (the name) of the web server, who can grant
>access to create content, who will finalize the program of the Ghana
>gathering,.........
>
>I'm getting more and more lost........
>
>
>
>On 6/14/07, marco <marco.pompe at web.de> wrote:
>>
>>hi Gerard
>>
>>no. i do not agree. i admit you offer the most pragmatic way and i guess
>>u will agree we may call it "meritocracy". that may suit everybody who
>>believes to be meritted. i am realistic enough to see that in abscence
>>of alternative structures we once more have to go that "way of the minor
>>disorder". but i totally agree with Ian in so far: in self-organisation
>>as a process of real equal rights and solidarity, as a matter of real
>>co-operation, we have a great value and a challange to face.
>>
>>concerning this "someone has to take the lead" i have another comment:
>>to lead doesnt automatically means someONE have to do it. i think we
>>all should improve in critically reflecting our merits and those of
>>others, that we may achieve a process within everybody is leading and
>>teaching as she/he is learning according to the added output of our all
>>best knowledge. this is not a fairy tale, as I experienced that in
>>variuos ways ...
>>
>>you are talking about the future as it is something to preserve. we live
>>in a world filled up with preservation, precautions, insurance and stuff
>>- yet we are going to destroy it and fail to stop exploiting, oppressing
>>and killing each other - how come? maybe its because of the very
>>limmited number of persons to contribute in the configuration of our
>>world?
>>
>>greetings, marco, berlin
>>
>>Fred Pook schrieb:
>> > Cheers Gerard!
>> > Totally agree with you, and yes I will also take a beer ...
>> > maybe self-reflection and communication is all that is needed in our
>> > open-source way of working and if that can get some more speed by an
>> > enlightened lead taking person.. hmm
>> > Greets Fred
>> >
>> >
>> > On 6/13/07, Gerard Mourits <gerard at mourits.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 13:44:54 -0400, "Ian Howard"
>> >> <ihoward at netdotworking.com> said:
>> >> > All,
>> >> >
>> >> > Not to be a thorn, but I would encourage us not to lose site of the
>> >> > original ideals of WSFII, that is an open, collaborative and
>> >> > self-organizing endeavour, modelled around open source. In that
>> >> light, I
>> >> > would suggest that we not appoint someone to be in charge, but that
>>we
>> >> > encourage some individuals to focus their contributions on 
>>particular
>> >> > aspects of this effort. If anything we should certainly focus on
>> >> making
>> >> > sure that we really encourage some local on the ground people to do
>> >> > participate more. Leaders in open source pull things together and
>> >> > encourage participation of others.
>> >> >
>> >> Nice words but are they really of this world?
>> >> I think Fred meant by his 'putting in charge' that if work is to be
>>done
>> >> somebody has to take the lead.
>> >> If nobody takes the lead and there is nobody 'in charge' then where 
>>are
>> >> we going to.
>> >> This don't mean that we need a kind of Hitler to marched in front of
>>the
>> >> troops.
>> >> We would certainly let this happen at all. Bu we need en lighted 
>>people
>> >> that shows us the road ahead.
>> >> 'Self-organizing endeavour' come out of books and with books we
>>describe
>> >> thing that passed.
>> >>
>> >> > So, to answer Tomas' questions:
>> >> >
>> >> > So who take the lead?  No one, this is a self-organizing effort
>> >> And out of this self-organizing effort comes what ? a leader?
>> >>
>> >> > When do we organize?  again, self-organize
>> >> And what happens if we got two self-organizing mechanisms?
>> >>
>> >> > When the first meeting to assess situation, offers and plan?  there
>> >> > should be an effort to encourage contributions and a wide call for
>> >> input
>> >> > and distributed decision making.
>> >> At first we need a direction: where are we going ?
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Anyone who knows me will know that this self-organizing arrangement
>>is
>> >> > not one that came naturally for this ex-soldier, though, I believe 
>>in
>> >> > open source and I believe that if we buy-in to the process of
>> >> > self-organization and that we work to optimize collaboration that
>>this
>> >> > will be something fruitful. Not only will we pull off a meeting,
>> >> but we
>> >> > will pull off another self-organizing event.
>> >> The problem is with self-organizing communities that there has to be
>> >> someone to point out to this direction (and take the lead).
>> >> It is not "if this" or "if that". It is "and this" "and that" and work
>> >> together on multiple levels.
>> >> http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/714
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Cheers!
>> >> Cheers to you! I'll now take a beer.
>> >>
>> >> Gerard
>> >> >
>> >> > Ian
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Fred Pook wrote:
>> >> > > Hiya,
>> >> > > I am happy this thread is picking up and we are chatting..
>> >> > > IMHO I would put Ashish in charge of this effort of making the
>>WSFII
>> >> > > online presence a solid one.
>> >> > > Please reply if there are objections to this
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Thanks Fred
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> > > On 6/5/07, Thomas Maketa <tmaketa at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > >> So who take the lead ?
>> >> > >> When do we organize?
>> >> > >> When the first meeting to assess situation, offers and plan?
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> On 6/5/07, Rob Dyke < rob at comwifinet.com> wrote:
>> >> > >> > Ashish, All,
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Here is my offer of contributing time and effort for the
>>critical
>> >> > >> > infrastructure side of things. I've much kit and much
>> >> caboodle, *some*
>> >> > >> > time... All donated towards WSFII.
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Looks like there are a couple of things immediately arising
>> >> from this
>> >> > >> > thread....
>> >> > >> > * Web presence overhaul - tool and template
>> >> > >> > * Import of OKFN hosted info
>> >> > >> > * Support for translations
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > I'm lurking with Saul in IRC.... let's continue this thread and
>> >> > >> chatter
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Rob
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > Saul Albert wrote:
>> >> > >> > > On Mon, Jun 04, 2007 at 10:39:15AM +0530, Assoc of Public
>> >> ICT Tools
>> >> > >> Access Prov wrote:
>> >> > >> > >
>> >> > >> > >>    Henceforth can we think of building a team of say 3 
>>people
>> >> > >> for the
>> >> > >> > >>    critical infrastructure ?  like the web site  & events.
>> >> > >> > >>
>> >> > >> > >
>> >> > >> > > I'm afraid I can't help out with infrastructure... but as I
>> >> said,
>> >> > >> I'd
>> >> > >> > > be *really* happy to contribute reports and updates from
>> >> London...
>> >> > >> > >
>> >> > >> > > I'd like to remind you all about the wsfii irc channel which
>> >> has
>> >> > >> been
>> >> > >> > > dead for a while - but could help if people are feeling
>> >> isolated
>> >> > >> in the
>> >> > >> > > way they're working ;)
>> >> > >> > >
>> >> > >> > > irc://irc.oftc.net#wsfii
>> >> > >> > >
>> >> > >> > > See you there maybe?
>> >> > >> > >
>> >> > >> > > I'll be idling there this morning, but I read scrollback :)
>> >> > >> > >
>> >> > >> > > X
>> >> > >> > >
>> >> > >> > > Saul.
>> >> > >> > >
>> >> > >> > >
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > >> > wsfii-discuss mailing list
>> >> > >> > wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> >> > >> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
>> >> > >> >
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >> _______________________________________________
>> >> > >> wsfii-discuss mailing list
>> >> > >> wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> >> > >> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >>
>> >> > >
>> >> > > _______________________________________________
>> >> > > wsfii-discuss mailing list
>> >> > > wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> >> > > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
>> >> > >
>> >> > > !DSPAM:1,4665c65f29641717162815!
>> >> > >
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > wsfii-discuss mailing list
>> >> > wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> >> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> wsfii-discuss mailing list
>> >> wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> >> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
>> >>
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > wsfii-discuss mailing list
>> > wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>> > http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
>> >
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>wsfii-discuss mailing list
>>wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>>http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss
>>

>_______________________________________________
>wsfii-discuss mailing list
>wsfii-discuss at lists.okfn.org
>http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/wsfii-discuss