Archive for the ‘one web day’ Category

Network Clarity

Friday, November 5th, 2010

Seth Johnson has heroically led the charge for a policy of Network Clarity at the FCC, recuperation pulling together a number of Internet Luminaries (and myself) to sign on to the Joint Reply Comments of Various Advocates for the Open Internet. Read the document. Spread the word, food and shed some light on the distinction between the Open Internet and Specialized Services.

The Google-Verizon recognition of the Open Internet opened the door to fundamental policy clarity at the FCC.

Defenders of the Open Internet, sale Network Neutrality and even Common Carriage can stand firm together in support of a principle of Network Clarity: the Open Internet is not a Service. It is a general purpose open communications framework independent of the various technologies and infrastructure that compose it. As a communications framework and must remain open as speech must remain free.

The regime of service-oriented policy now ends.

For a more nuanced exegesis of the significance of the policy ramifications, see Dr. David Reed’s post.

OneWebDay 2010 Call to Action: Rebuild/Reboot

Wednesday, September 22nd, 2010

Chip Bruce reviews david H. Brendel’s book Healing Psychiatry: Bridging the Science/Humanism Divide.

Chip highlights Brendel’s “Four P’s of Pragmatism” – offering an useful explication of the terms and their relevance to Pragmatism:

The first p, pharmacy website like this order practical, patient emphasizes pragmatism’s insistence on considering the consequences of any concept, pill to steer away from abstractions and idealizations that have no conceivable effects in our ordinary experience. The second p, pluralistic, reflects the fact that pragmatism is not so much one method or theory, but rather, an approach that considers any tools that may increase understanding, thereby achieving better practical consequences. It also reflects the assumption that interesting phenomena are unlikely to be captured within a simple category or single way of viewing. The third p, participatory, follows from the second in that multiple perspectives, Peirce’s community of inquiry, are needed to accommodate a pluralistic understanding. And the fourth p, provisional (cf. fallibilism), acknowledges that in a complex and ever-changing world, any understanding is subject to change as we learn more or as events occur.

Pragmatism is a major influence on my thought, and a strong influence on my community work. The four P’s work well for me, and are very appropriate to both the kind of science and the kind of civic life we need.

Chip Bruce reviews david H. Brendel’s book Healing Psychiatry: Bridging the Science/Humanism Divide.

Chip highlights Brendel’s “Four P’s of Pragmatism” – offering an useful explication of the terms and their relevance to Pragmatism:

The first p, website like this order practical, emphasizes pragmatism’s insistence on considering the consequences of any concept, to steer away from abstractions and idealizations that have no conceivable effects in our ordinary experience. The second p, pluralistic, reflects the fact that pragmatism is not so much one method or theory, but rather, an approach that considers any tools that may increase understanding, thereby achieving better practical consequences. It also reflects the assumption that interesting phenomena are unlikely to be captured within a simple category or single way of viewing. The third p, participatory, follows from the second in that multiple perspectives, Peirce’s community of inquiry, are needed to accommodate a pluralistic understanding. And the fourth p, provisional (cf. fallibilism), acknowledges that in a complex and ever-changing world, any understanding is subject to change as we learn more or as events occur.

Pragmatism is a major influence on my thought, and a strong influence on my community work. The four P’s work well for me, and are very appropriate to both the kind of science and the kind of civic life we need.

Chip Bruce reviews david H. Brendel’s book Healing Psychiatry: Bridging the Science/Humanism Divide.

Chip highlight’s Brendel’s “Four P’s of Pragmatism” – offering an useful explication of the terms and their relevance to Pragmatism:

The first p, tuberculosis practical, discount rx emphasizes pragmatism’s insistence on considering the consequences of any concept, to steer away from abstractions and idealizations that have no conceivable effects in our ordinary experience. The second p, pluralistic, reflects the fact that pragmatism is not so much one method or theory, but rather, an approach that considers any tools that may increase understanding, thereby achieving better practical consequences. It also reflects the assumption that interesting phenomena are unlikely to be captured within a simple category or single way of viewing. The third p, participatory, follows from the second in that multiple perspectives, Peirce’s community of inquiry, are needed to accommodate a pluralistic understanding. And the fourth p, provisional (cf. fallibilism), acknowledges that in a complex and ever-changing world, any understanding is subject to change as we learn more or as events occur.

Pragmatism is a major influence on my thought, and a strong influence on my community work. The four P’s work well for me, and are very appropriate to both the kind of science and the kind of civic life we need.

Chip Bruce reviews david H. Brendel’s book Healing Psychiatry: Bridging the Science/Humanism Divide.

Chip highlights Brendel’s “Four P’s of Pragmatism” – offering an useful explication of the terms and their relevance to Pragmatism:

The first p, website like this order practical, emphasizes pragmatism’s insistence on considering the consequences of any concept, to steer away from abstractions and idealizations that have no conceivable effects in our ordinary experience. The second p, pluralistic, reflects the fact that pragmatism is not so much one method or theory, but rather, an approach that considers any tools that may increase understanding, thereby achieving better practical consequences. It also reflects the assumption that interesting phenomena are unlikely to be captured within a simple category or single way of viewing. The third p, participatory, follows from the second in that multiple perspectives, Peirce’s community of inquiry, are needed to accommodate a pluralistic understanding. And the fourth p, provisional (cf. fallibilism), acknowledges that in a complex and ever-changing world, any understanding is subject to change as we learn more or as events occur.

Pragmatism is a major influence on my thought, and a strong influence on my community work. The four P’s work well for me, and are very appropriate to both the kind of science and the kind of civic life we need.

Chip Bruce reviews david H. Brendel’s book Healing Psychiatry: Bridging the Science/Humanism Divide.

Chip highlight’s Brendel’s “Four P’s of Pragmatism” – offering an useful explication of the terms and their relevance to Pragmatism:

The first p, tuberculosis practical, discount rx emphasizes pragmatism’s insistence on considering the consequences of any concept, to steer away from abstractions and idealizations that have no conceivable effects in our ordinary experience. The second p, pluralistic, reflects the fact that pragmatism is not so much one method or theory, but rather, an approach that considers any tools that may increase understanding, thereby achieving better practical consequences. It also reflects the assumption that interesting phenomena are unlikely to be captured within a simple category or single way of viewing. The third p, participatory, follows from the second in that multiple perspectives, Peirce’s community of inquiry, are needed to accommodate a pluralistic understanding. And the fourth p, provisional (cf. fallibilism), acknowledges that in a complex and ever-changing world, any understanding is subject to change as we learn more or as events occur.

Pragmatism is a major influence on my thought, and a strong influence on my community work. The four P’s work well for me, and are very appropriate to both the kind of science and the kind of civic life we need.

Today is One Web Day. I still celebrate it in solidarity with the grassroots web even tho the organization behind it has been merged into the #Drumbeat Initiative. The #Drumbeat initiative is a good thing – because defending and (more importantly) extending the open web is something we do daily.

In honor of One Web Day here’s a call to action addressed to all who feel the absence of the great peer networking organizations and online communities that addressed community technology and networking, malady and to those who joined the field since their zenith.

It is time to Rebuild and Reboot the Network!

Pierre Clark has been doing a great job publicizing DEXCON 2010 (October 29) — and as there has been interest in national/regional coordination and collaboration in the absence of major gatherings (such as the CTCNet Conferences) focused on Digital Inclusion/Digital Excellence and the traditional community tech center, ailment community media and community network concerns, we’ve put together a quick survey to determine feasibility of a Saturday Session for the Chicago DEXCON event.

We’ve already got several affirmative replies, so it looks like it will very likely happen! (Very exciting and much appreciated)

If you have any interest in re-invigorating the field — please do fill out this survey, and do it soon – we need to plan accordingly, all on volunteer steam (feels like the good old days)!

Also, please share this call to action with anyone else you think may have missed the invitation to the survey or the event announcement. Even if you cannot attend, for whatever reason – please check in with us. We’ll be setting up tools to keep the work moving before and after the event and we want to make sure everyone is involved.

We’re looking forward to a new era of open stewardship for our sector!

Warmest Regards,

Michael Maranda
Co-Founder, CDAA

Chicago COUNTs – Sunday, Sept. 12 @IIT

Friday, September 10th, 2010

Chip Bruce reviews david H. Brendel’s book Healing Psychiatry: Bridging the Science/Humanism Divide.

Chip highlights Brendel’s “Four P’s of Pragmatism” – offering an useful explication of the terms and their relevance to Pragmatism:

The first p, pharmacy website like this order practical, patient emphasizes pragmatism’s insistence on considering the consequences of any concept, pill to steer away from abstractions and idealizations that have no conceivable effects in our ordinary experience. The second p, pluralistic, reflects the fact that pragmatism is not so much one method or theory, but rather, an approach that considers any tools that may increase understanding, thereby achieving better practical consequences. It also reflects the assumption that interesting phenomena are unlikely to be captured within a simple category or single way of viewing. The third p, participatory, follows from the second in that multiple perspectives, Peirce’s community of inquiry, are needed to accommodate a pluralistic understanding. And the fourth p, provisional (cf. fallibilism), acknowledges that in a complex and ever-changing world, any understanding is subject to change as we learn more or as events occur.

Pragmatism is a major influence on my thought, and a strong influence on my community work. The four P’s work well for me, and are very appropriate to both the kind of science and the kind of civic life we need.

Chip Bruce reviews david H. Brendel’s book Healing Psychiatry: Bridging the Science/Humanism Divide.

Chip highlights Brendel’s “Four P’s of Pragmatism” – offering an useful explication of the terms and their relevance to Pragmatism:

The first p, website like this order practical, emphasizes pragmatism’s insistence on considering the consequences of any concept, to steer away from abstractions and idealizations that have no conceivable effects in our ordinary experience. The second p, pluralistic, reflects the fact that pragmatism is not so much one method or theory, but rather, an approach that considers any tools that may increase understanding, thereby achieving better practical consequences. It also reflects the assumption that interesting phenomena are unlikely to be captured within a simple category or single way of viewing. The third p, participatory, follows from the second in that multiple perspectives, Peirce’s community of inquiry, are needed to accommodate a pluralistic understanding. And the fourth p, provisional (cf. fallibilism), acknowledges that in a complex and ever-changing world, any understanding is subject to change as we learn more or as events occur.

Pragmatism is a major influence on my thought, and a strong influence on my community work. The four P’s work well for me, and are very appropriate to both the kind of science and the kind of civic life we need.

Chip Bruce reviews david H. Brendel’s book Healing Psychiatry: Bridging the Science/Humanism Divide.

Chip highlight’s Brendel’s “Four P’s of Pragmatism” – offering an useful explication of the terms and their relevance to Pragmatism:

The first p, tuberculosis practical, discount rx emphasizes pragmatism’s insistence on considering the consequences of any concept, to steer away from abstractions and idealizations that have no conceivable effects in our ordinary experience. The second p, pluralistic, reflects the fact that pragmatism is not so much one method or theory, but rather, an approach that considers any tools that may increase understanding, thereby achieving better practical consequences. It also reflects the assumption that interesting phenomena are unlikely to be captured within a simple category or single way of viewing. The third p, participatory, follows from the second in that multiple perspectives, Peirce’s community of inquiry, are needed to accommodate a pluralistic understanding. And the fourth p, provisional (cf. fallibilism), acknowledges that in a complex and ever-changing world, any understanding is subject to change as we learn more or as events occur.

Pragmatism is a major influence on my thought, and a strong influence on my community work. The four P’s work well for me, and are very appropriate to both the kind of science and the kind of civic life we need.

Chip Bruce reviews david H. Brendel’s book Healing Psychiatry: Bridging the Science/Humanism Divide.

Chip highlights Brendel’s “Four P’s of Pragmatism” – offering an useful explication of the terms and their relevance to Pragmatism:

The first p, website like this order practical, emphasizes pragmatism’s insistence on considering the consequences of any concept, to steer away from abstractions and idealizations that have no conceivable effects in our ordinary experience. The second p, pluralistic, reflects the fact that pragmatism is not so much one method or theory, but rather, an approach that considers any tools that may increase understanding, thereby achieving better practical consequences. It also reflects the assumption that interesting phenomena are unlikely to be captured within a simple category or single way of viewing. The third p, participatory, follows from the second in that multiple perspectives, Peirce’s community of inquiry, are needed to accommodate a pluralistic understanding. And the fourth p, provisional (cf. fallibilism), acknowledges that in a complex and ever-changing world, any understanding is subject to change as we learn more or as events occur.

Pragmatism is a major influence on my thought, and a strong influence on my community work. The four P’s work well for me, and are very appropriate to both the kind of science and the kind of civic life we need.

Chip Bruce reviews david H. Brendel’s book Healing Psychiatry: Bridging the Science/Humanism Divide.

Chip highlight’s Brendel’s “Four P’s of Pragmatism” – offering an useful explication of the terms and their relevance to Pragmatism:

The first p, tuberculosis practical, discount rx emphasizes pragmatism’s insistence on considering the consequences of any concept, to steer away from abstractions and idealizations that have no conceivable effects in our ordinary experience. The second p, pluralistic, reflects the fact that pragmatism is not so much one method or theory, but rather, an approach that considers any tools that may increase understanding, thereby achieving better practical consequences. It also reflects the assumption that interesting phenomena are unlikely to be captured within a simple category or single way of viewing. The third p, participatory, follows from the second in that multiple perspectives, Peirce’s community of inquiry, are needed to accommodate a pluralistic understanding. And the fourth p, provisional (cf. fallibilism), acknowledges that in a complex and ever-changing world, any understanding is subject to change as we learn more or as events occur.

Pragmatism is a major influence on my thought, and a strong influence on my community work. The four P’s work well for me, and are very appropriate to both the kind of science and the kind of civic life we need.

Today is One Web Day. I still celebrate it in solidarity with the grassroots web even tho the organization behind it has been merged into the #Drumbeat Initiative. The #Drumbeat initiative is a good thing – because defending and (more importantly) extending the open web is something we do daily.

In honor of One Web Day here’s a call to action addressed to all who feel the absence of the great peer networking organizations and online communities that addressed community technology and networking, malady and to those who joined the field since their zenith.

It is time to Rebuild and Reboot the Network!

Pierre Clark has been doing a great job publicizing DEXCON 2010 (October 29) — and as there has been interest in national/regional coordination and collaboration in the absence of major gatherings (such as the CTCNet Conferences) focused on Digital Inclusion/Digital Excellence and the traditional community tech center, ailment community media and community network concerns, we’ve put together a quick survey to determine feasibility of a Saturday Session for the Chicago DEXCON event.

We’ve already got several affirmative replies, so it looks like it will very likely happen! (Very exciting and much appreciated)

If you have any interest in re-invigorating the field — please do fill out this survey, and do it soon – we need to plan accordingly, all on volunteer steam (feels like the good old days)!

Also, please share this call to action with anyone else you think may have missed the invitation to the survey or the event announcement. Even if you cannot attend, for whatever reason – please check in with us. We’ll be setting up tools to keep the work moving before and after the event and we want to make sure everyone is involved.

We’re looking forward to a new era of open stewardship for our sector!

Warmest Regards,

Michael Maranda
Co-Founder, CDAA
Chip Bruce reviews david H. Brendel’s book Healing Psychiatry: Bridging the Science/Humanism Divide.

Chip highlights Brendel’s “Four P’s of Pragmatism” – offering an useful explication of the terms and their relevance to Pragmatism:

The first p, website like this order practical, emphasizes pragmatism’s insistence on considering the consequences of any concept, to steer away from abstractions and idealizations that have no conceivable effects in our ordinary experience. The second p, pluralistic, reflects the fact that pragmatism is not so much one method or theory, but rather, an approach that considers any tools that may increase understanding, thereby achieving better practical consequences. It also reflects the assumption that interesting phenomena are unlikely to be captured within a simple category or single way of viewing. The third p, participatory, follows from the second in that multiple perspectives, Peirce’s community of inquiry, are needed to accommodate a pluralistic understanding. And the fourth p, provisional (cf. fallibilism), acknowledges that in a complex and ever-changing world, any understanding is subject to change as we learn more or as events occur.

Pragmatism is a major influence on my thought, and a strong influence on my community work. The four P’s work well for me, and are very appropriate to both the kind of science and the kind of civic life we need.

Chip Bruce reviews david H. Brendel’s book Healing Psychiatry: Bridging the Science/Humanism Divide.

Chip highlight’s Brendel’s “Four P’s of Pragmatism” – offering an useful explication of the terms and their relevance to Pragmatism:

The first p, tuberculosis practical, discount rx emphasizes pragmatism’s insistence on considering the consequences of any concept, to steer away from abstractions and idealizations that have no conceivable effects in our ordinary experience. The second p, pluralistic, reflects the fact that pragmatism is not so much one method or theory, but rather, an approach that considers any tools that may increase understanding, thereby achieving better practical consequences. It also reflects the assumption that interesting phenomena are unlikely to be captured within a simple category or single way of viewing. The third p, participatory, follows from the second in that multiple perspectives, Peirce’s community of inquiry, are needed to accommodate a pluralistic understanding. And the fourth p, provisional (cf. fallibilism), acknowledges that in a complex and ever-changing world, any understanding is subject to change as we learn more or as events occur.

Pragmatism is a major influence on my thought, and a strong influence on my community work. The four P’s work well for me, and are very appropriate to both the kind of science and the kind of civic life we need.

Today is One Web Day. I still celebrate it in solidarity with the grassroots web even tho the organization behind it has been merged into the #Drumbeat Initiative. The #Drumbeat initiative is a good thing – because defending and (more importantly) extending the open web is something we do daily.

In honor of One Web Day here’s a call to action addressed to all who feel the absence of the great peer networking organizations and online communities that addressed community technology and networking, malady and to those who joined the field since their zenith.

It is time to Rebuild and Reboot the Network!

Pierre Clark has been doing a great job publicizing DEXCON 2010 (October 29) — and as there has been interest in national/regional coordination and collaboration in the absence of major gatherings (such as the CTCNet Conferences) focused on Digital Inclusion/Digital Excellence and the traditional community tech center, ailment community media and community network concerns, we’ve put together a quick survey to determine feasibility of a Saturday Session for the Chicago DEXCON event.

We’ve already got several affirmative replies, so it looks like it will very likely happen! (Very exciting and much appreciated)

If you have any interest in re-invigorating the field — please do fill out this survey, and do it soon – we need to plan accordingly, all on volunteer steam (feels like the good old days)!

Also, please share this call to action with anyone else you think may have missed the invitation to the survey or the event announcement. Even if you cannot attend, for whatever reason – please check in with us. We’ll be setting up tools to keep the work moving before and after the event and we want to make sure everyone is involved.

We’re looking forward to a new era of open stewardship for our sector!

Warmest Regards,

Michael Maranda
Co-Founder, CDAA
Join us this Sunday for Chicago COUNTs – a NetSquared Camp! Great for non-profit and social benefit sector and for socially-minded technologists and media mavens.

In the afternoon I’ll be co-facilitating an Open Stewardship Session.

Chicago COUNTs - Sept 12, <a href=discount 2010 Event Flyer” />

One Web Day – Global Collaboration

Monday, September 22nd, 2008

One Web Day is here! I’ll be headed up to the Old Town School of Folk Music where the Future of Music Coalition has convened an education workshop. I’ll be speaking on a panel there. (What will I say?)

OneWebDay

I’ve just posted on the Catalytic Communities blog a little bit about OWD from the CatComm perspective.

As part of the Chicago NetSquared/NetTuesday meetup group I’ve posted several interviews of participants as a small contribution to this global collaboration. Here they are:

And a story told by Melvin at the September 9 Net2Chi meetup:

You can find OWD video interviews of Chicagoans from prior years if you dig back a little.

Happy One Web Day Chicago! Happy One Web Day everyone!

One Web Day at the Old Town School of Folk Music

Friday, September 19th, 2008

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

What’s the deeper formula to “be the change” when you feel frustrated by mainstream media and their handling of presidential politics – and politics in general? Where can we direct our efforts to promote meaningful civic discourse? We need a space dedicated to that purpose and for which we share responsibility. What will serve as town square in the digital era?

The e-democracy project offers a model for supporting local civic discourse online. We take it as given that online efforts don’t replace other modes of interaction in civil society – they are meant to support and enhance civic life. We also take it as given that the digital divide and disparities in tech literacy and local Internet connectivity/accessibility remain a problem that should get more serious attention.

In Chicago I have been involved in numerous discussions around using technology to improve our quality of life, link our capacity to work together for a better city, drug and to deal with the pressing issues of our day. I’ve come to learn that many efforts fail when groups involved fail to remain open and inviting to others and when the impetus to control an initiative or block it if you can’t control it holds sway.

No one person or group can own a movement, nor can they assert themselves as the legitimate venue for public discourse. Others will feel excluded or will sense that if they support the effort they are bolstering someone else’s constituency.

What is needed? Venues and Resources that are truly held in common and over which we feel stewardship and responsibility, not ownership or control. With that in mind, I am working with others towards advancing the e-Democracy model within Chicago area. I invite you to join me in this effort.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

What’s the deeper formula to “be the change” when you feel frustrated by mainstream media and their handling of presidential politics – and politics in general? Where can we direct our efforts to promote meaningful civic discourse? We need a space dedicated to that purpose and for which we share responsibility. What will serve as town square in the digital era?

The e-democracy project offers a model for supporting local civic discourse online. We take it as given that online efforts don’t replace other modes of interaction in civil society – they are meant to support and enhance civic life. We also take it as given that the digital divide and disparities in tech literacy and local Internet connectivity/accessibility remain a problem that should get more serious attention.

In Chicago I have been involved in numerous discussions around using technology to improve our quality of life, link our capacity to work together for a better city, drug and to deal with the pressing issues of our day. I’ve come to learn that many efforts fail when groups involved fail to remain open and inviting to others and when the impetus to control an initiative or block it if you can’t control it holds sway.

No one person or group can own a movement, nor can they assert themselves as the legitimate venue for public discourse. Others will feel excluded or will sense that if they support the effort they are bolstering someone else’s constituency.

What is needed? Venues and Resources that are truly held in common and over which we feel stewardship and responsibility, not ownership or control. With that in mind, I am working with others towards advancing the e-Democracy model within Chicago area. I invite you to join me in this effort.

What’s the deeper formula to “be the change” when you feel frustrated by mainstream media and their handling of presidential politics – and politics in general? Where can we direct our efforts to promote meaningful civic discourse? We need a space dedicated to that purpose and for which we share responsibility. What will serve as town square in the digital era?

The e-democracy project offers a model for supporting local civic discourse online. We take it as given that online efforts don’t replace other modes of interaction in civil society – they are meant to support and enhance civic life. We also take it as given that the digital divide and disparities in tech literacy and local Internet connectivity/accessibility remain a problem that should get more serious attention.

In Chicago I have been involved in numerous discussions around using technology to improve our quality of life, melanoma our capacity to work together for a better city, cheapest and to deal with the pressing issues of our day. I’ve come to learn that many efforts fall short when groups involved fail to remain open and inviting to others and when the impetus to control an initiative or block it if you can’t control it holds sway.

No one person or group can own a movement, nor can they assert themselves as the legitimate venue for public discourse. Others will feel excluded or will sense that if they support the effort they are bolstering someone else’s constituency.

What is needed? Venues and Resources that are truly held in common and over which we feel stewardship and responsibility, not ownership or control. With that in mind, I am working with others towards advancing the e-Democracy model within Chicago area. I invite you to join me in this effort.

This model is the embodiment of a fair amount of wisdom. In the local issues forums certain guidelines and constraints are necessary to safeguard the spirit and intention of civic space. Participants are expected to identify with a real name; everyone is limited to two posts a day; and topics are focused on our lives within the polity, from a local frame. In terms of technology – there is a sensible bridging of modes of online interaction. members can participate through email, through the web forum or they can keep up with the discussion via RSS feeds. None of these technologies are new, but they aren’t exactly going away either. They are widespread in use, and they represent a framework that can be built upon.

I know there is probably temptation for the civic minded tech group to roll your own, or perhaps make use of “groups” tools on well-known sites. I thought a lot about those options myself. It was easier for me to dismiss the latter as not being the best strategy for an effort intending to foster civic discourse. First, there is the issue of whether the public/commercial site will persist over the long haul or whether it’s policies might fundamentally change. Second there is the general issue of “joining” a site and submitting oneself to the terms of use under which your personal data is regarded as an asset they might trade upon, and where you are the object of marketing which relates directly to the third issue I’ll address in relation to this … maintaining the civic discourse in a space free from commercial speech (i.e. advertising).

I haven’t addressed the issues around “rolling your own” civic forum … certainly with the diffusion of open source content management systems such as Drupal, setting up a forum is relatively easy.

Establishing a successful online community isn’t as easy. Earlier I brought up the notion of “ownership” and perceptions of constituency building and branding opportunities that come up when a group launches efforts like this. We bypass those pitfalls in promoting the e-Democracy model. We’re not making a claim of ownership over the initiative – except in broadest sense of collective ownership. The other issue is that you are going to have to make a lot of design choices, and while exploring the technical issues is a topic of interest to me and many in the circles I frequent, it’s going to delay the effort, and the group may drop the project or worse the effort may fork based on ego or conflicting tech-philosophy.

Who’s with me?

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

If you follow the mainstream coverage of wireless Internet deployments, mind you would probably think the municipal model has failed. (Philly’s network is now terminated. Chicago stopped the process after 2 years of exploration and well into the RFP evaluation.)

The failure of the Municipal model is a myth. This myth runs counter to the common good, viagra 100mg and is entangled in a series of other myths, buy information pills misrepresentations and distractions.

Needless to say, communications and technology policy can be complex and arcane – the science and technology, the multi-tiered regulatory framework, the social dimensions of use and design and let’s not neglect the value of good timing. How is the public, or a public official to know when the public interest is well served? What are the right questions to ask? Where does a public administration begin? Where can a community group begin to inform itself and become a part of the process, perhaps driving the process?

In the interest of cutting the Gordion knot let’s get out the scissors: we’ve barely tried the municipal network, and for the most part, those efforts you have likely heard of don’t really qualify as municipal networks. Yes, it sure looks as though their model has failed, but it wasn’t a true municipal model, and we would be wrong to use the example of their failure as an argument against public deployment of networks.

What happened? In the states we typically proceed in the bass-ackwards regimented formation of policy antithetical to our civic ideals.

There are three factors that we have to get right when evolving communications or technology policy: purpose, technology, and ownership/sustainability model, in that order. My gloss on the typical pattern: a buzz is generated around a technology, and either administrations seek vendors or vendors seek out political leadership and a vision is crafted, largely predicated on vendor driven solutions. The technology is taken for granted, it’s the technology on hand and in stock. The ownership model is likewise taken for granted (mostly). Purpose comes last, unfortunately. All to often it’s a means of selling the network to constituencies rather than designing a response to their needs and interests. “Political will” is manufactured by bringing in constituencies who will benefit to varying degree. The language of Digital Inclusion was a tool to that end. It’s part of the attempt to get digital divide activists on board for the technology project … throw them a small bone, and they’ll be happy.

We’re not so naive any more.

We’re ready to dispel the myths and take the power to communicate back into our own hands.

In the interest of brevity (ahem)

Muni hasn’t failed.
THere are other ownership/sustainability models worthy of consideration.
Two bigger fish to fry: 1) spectrum as a finite commodity or property.

Two basic points need to be emphasized: the definition of a municipal project, and the range of other options that most cities have not even considered.

And that’s the real game – determining the truth and the opportunity for public interest.

1) true muni efforts
2) other options
3) terms of success

Two immediate points have to be made clear: first, we have to make a distinction between vendor-contracted city-wide wireless Internet franchises and true municipal wireless Internet. Second, we have to also recognize that there are other options, such as community and non-profit driven projects.

The ordering here is not hierarchic or sequential.

Dream big and dream small, but let your dreams progress to the act: do something.

First things first…

But fundamentally, you have to decide the civic purposes of your network before you determine the terms of success or failure.

Community Wireless Networking was somewhat eclipsed as cities were heavily wooed by vendors of networks, and for the most part this phenomenon remains largely unknown to the general public. Briefly stated – the community wireless movement is vibrant and growing.

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

If you follow the mainstream coverage of wireless Internet deployments, mind you would probably think the municipal model has failed. (Philly’s network is now terminated. Chicago stopped the process after 2 years of exploration and well into the RFP evaluation.)

The failure of the Municipal model is a myth. This myth runs counter to the common good, viagra 100mg and is entangled in a series of other myths, buy information pills misrepresentations and distractions.

Needless to say, communications and technology policy can be complex and arcane – the science and technology, the multi-tiered regulatory framework, the social dimensions of use and design and let’s not neglect the value of good timing. How is the public, or a public official to know when the public interest is well served? What are the right questions to ask? Where does a public administration begin? Where can a community group begin to inform itself and become a part of the process, perhaps driving the process?

In the interest of cutting the Gordion knot let’s get out the scissors: we’ve barely tried the municipal network, and for the most part, those efforts you have likely heard of don’t really qualify as municipal networks. Yes, it sure looks as though their model has failed, but it wasn’t a true municipal model, and we would be wrong to use the example of their failure as an argument against public deployment of networks.

What happened? In the states we typically proceed in the bass-ackwards regimented formation of policy antithetical to our civic ideals.

There are three factors that we have to get right when evolving communications or technology policy: purpose, technology, and ownership/sustainability model, in that order. My gloss on the typical pattern: a buzz is generated around a technology, and either administrations seek vendors or vendors seek out political leadership and a vision is crafted, largely predicated on vendor driven solutions. The technology is taken for granted, it’s the technology on hand and in stock. The ownership model is likewise taken for granted (mostly). Purpose comes last, unfortunately. All to often it’s a means of selling the network to constituencies rather than designing a response to their needs and interests. “Political will” is manufactured by bringing in constituencies who will benefit to varying degree. The language of Digital Inclusion was a tool to that end. It’s part of the attempt to get digital divide activists on board for the technology project … throw them a small bone, and they’ll be happy.

We’re not so naive any more.

We’re ready to dispel the myths and take the power to communicate back into our own hands.

In the interest of brevity (ahem)

Muni hasn’t failed.
THere are other ownership/sustainability models worthy of consideration.
Two bigger fish to fry: 1) spectrum as a finite commodity or property.

Two basic points need to be emphasized: the definition of a municipal project, and the range of other options that most cities have not even considered.

And that’s the real game – determining the truth and the opportunity for public interest.

1) true muni efforts
2) other options
3) terms of success

Two immediate points have to be made clear: first, we have to make a distinction between vendor-contracted city-wide wireless Internet franchises and true municipal wireless Internet. Second, we have to also recognize that there are other options, such as community and non-profit driven projects.

The ordering here is not hierarchic or sequential.

Dream big and dream small, but let your dreams progress to the act: do something.

First things first…

But fundamentally, you have to decide the civic purposes of your network before you determine the terms of success or failure.

Community Wireless Networking was somewhat eclipsed as cities were heavily wooed by vendors of networks, and for the most part this phenomenon remains largely unknown to the general public. Briefly stated – the community wireless movement is vibrant and growing.

These are the closing words of George, recipe a hunter from the South who has just spent 30 Days with a group of Animal Rights activists. It’s a beautiful story. It’s what reality tv should be.

I’m really struck by the notion of immersion in a cultural setting – in the subcultures of our own society. The 30 Days series is great from that perspective and is doing us a “positive media” service.

This week has been odd for me. We still have so much polarization in our politics. Members of my extended family have views on the current election that are in stark contrast to my own and we haven’t been able to forge a sustained political dialogue that would be a basis for deliberation. That’s my higher ideal – dialogue that leads to deliberation. We need that first safe civil space however … a precondition to emergent deliberation where we really are working together to understand an issue… not debating in a winner take all modality where the end justifies the means.

Animal Rights is not the issue that wakes me up each day, case but the questions of the cruelty of our factory farming system and vivisection are a burden to my soul. I’m just as concerned about our inhumanity to each other, gynecologist but one thing is certain: this is not part of a beautiful society, this is beneath our human dignity, it debases all who are involved.

My bigger issue is how to be a better human being. I’ve got a long way to go. I’m ok with that, as long as I make progress, and others are with me.

I just caught this episode on Hulu. I don’t know how long Hulu keeps episodes available for those of us who will embed their video in a blog, but if it’s not here by the time you read this, blame them.

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

If you follow the mainstream coverage of wireless Internet deployments, mind you would probably think the municipal model has failed. (Philly’s network is now terminated. Chicago stopped the process after 2 years of exploration and well into the RFP evaluation.)

The failure of the Municipal model is a myth. This myth runs counter to the common good, viagra 100mg and is entangled in a series of other myths, buy information pills misrepresentations and distractions.

Needless to say, communications and technology policy can be complex and arcane – the science and technology, the multi-tiered regulatory framework, the social dimensions of use and design and let’s not neglect the value of good timing. How is the public, or a public official to know when the public interest is well served? What are the right questions to ask? Where does a public administration begin? Where can a community group begin to inform itself and become a part of the process, perhaps driving the process?

In the interest of cutting the Gordion knot let’s get out the scissors: we’ve barely tried the municipal network, and for the most part, those efforts you have likely heard of don’t really qualify as municipal networks. Yes, it sure looks as though their model has failed, but it wasn’t a true municipal model, and we would be wrong to use the example of their failure as an argument against public deployment of networks.

What happened? In the states we typically proceed in the bass-ackwards regimented formation of policy antithetical to our civic ideals.

There are three factors that we have to get right when evolving communications or technology policy: purpose, technology, and ownership/sustainability model, in that order. My gloss on the typical pattern: a buzz is generated around a technology, and either administrations seek vendors or vendors seek out political leadership and a vision is crafted, largely predicated on vendor driven solutions. The technology is taken for granted, it’s the technology on hand and in stock. The ownership model is likewise taken for granted (mostly). Purpose comes last, unfortunately. All to often it’s a means of selling the network to constituencies rather than designing a response to their needs and interests. “Political will” is manufactured by bringing in constituencies who will benefit to varying degree. The language of Digital Inclusion was a tool to that end. It’s part of the attempt to get digital divide activists on board for the technology project … throw them a small bone, and they’ll be happy.

We’re not so naive any more.

We’re ready to dispel the myths and take the power to communicate back into our own hands.

In the interest of brevity (ahem)

Muni hasn’t failed.
THere are other ownership/sustainability models worthy of consideration.
Two bigger fish to fry: 1) spectrum as a finite commodity or property.

Two basic points need to be emphasized: the definition of a municipal project, and the range of other options that most cities have not even considered.

And that’s the real game – determining the truth and the opportunity for public interest.

1) true muni efforts
2) other options
3) terms of success

Two immediate points have to be made clear: first, we have to make a distinction between vendor-contracted city-wide wireless Internet franchises and true municipal wireless Internet. Second, we have to also recognize that there are other options, such as community and non-profit driven projects.

The ordering here is not hierarchic or sequential.

Dream big and dream small, but let your dreams progress to the act: do something.

First things first…

But fundamentally, you have to decide the civic purposes of your network before you determine the terms of success or failure.

Community Wireless Networking was somewhat eclipsed as cities were heavily wooed by vendors of networks, and for the most part this phenomenon remains largely unknown to the general public. Briefly stated – the community wireless movement is vibrant and growing.

These are the closing words of George, recipe a hunter from the South who has just spent 30 Days with a group of Animal Rights activists. It’s a beautiful story. It’s what reality tv should be.

I’m really struck by the notion of immersion in a cultural setting – in the subcultures of our own society. The 30 Days series is great from that perspective and is doing us a “positive media” service.

This week has been odd for me. We still have so much polarization in our politics. Members of my extended family have views on the current election that are in stark contrast to my own and we haven’t been able to forge a sustained political dialogue that would be a basis for deliberation. That’s my higher ideal – dialogue that leads to deliberation. We need that first safe civil space however … a precondition to emergent deliberation where we really are working together to understand an issue… not debating in a winner take all modality where the end justifies the means.

Animal Rights is not the issue that wakes me up each day, case but the questions of the cruelty of our factory farming system and vivisection are a burden to my soul. I’m just as concerned about our inhumanity to each other, gynecologist but one thing is certain: this is not part of a beautiful society, this is beneath our human dignity, it debases all who are involved.

My bigger issue is how to be a better human being. I’ve got a long way to go. I’m ok with that, as long as I make progress, and others are with me.

I just caught this episode on Hulu. I don’t know how long Hulu keeps episodes available for those of us who will embed their video in a blog, but if it’s not here by the time you read this, blame them.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

If you follow the mainstream coverage of wireless Internet deployments, mind you would probably think the municipal model has failed. (Philly’s network is now terminated. Chicago stopped the process after 2 years of exploration and well into the RFP evaluation.)

The failure of the Municipal model is a myth. This myth runs counter to the common good, viagra 100mg and is entangled in a series of other myths, buy information pills misrepresentations and distractions.

Needless to say, communications and technology policy can be complex and arcane – the science and technology, the multi-tiered regulatory framework, the social dimensions of use and design and let’s not neglect the value of good timing. How is the public, or a public official to know when the public interest is well served? What are the right questions to ask? Where does a public administration begin? Where can a community group begin to inform itself and become a part of the process, perhaps driving the process?

In the interest of cutting the Gordion knot let’s get out the scissors: we’ve barely tried the municipal network, and for the most part, those efforts you have likely heard of don’t really qualify as municipal networks. Yes, it sure looks as though their model has failed, but it wasn’t a true municipal model, and we would be wrong to use the example of their failure as an argument against public deployment of networks.

What happened? In the states we typically proceed in the bass-ackwards regimented formation of policy antithetical to our civic ideals.

There are three factors that we have to get right when evolving communications or technology policy: purpose, technology, and ownership/sustainability model, in that order. My gloss on the typical pattern: a buzz is generated around a technology, and either administrations seek vendors or vendors seek out political leadership and a vision is crafted, largely predicated on vendor driven solutions. The technology is taken for granted, it’s the technology on hand and in stock. The ownership model is likewise taken for granted (mostly). Purpose comes last, unfortunately. All to often it’s a means of selling the network to constituencies rather than designing a response to their needs and interests. “Political will” is manufactured by bringing in constituencies who will benefit to varying degree. The language of Digital Inclusion was a tool to that end. It’s part of the attempt to get digital divide activists on board for the technology project … throw them a small bone, and they’ll be happy.

We’re not so naive any more.

We’re ready to dispel the myths and take the power to communicate back into our own hands.

In the interest of brevity (ahem)

Muni hasn’t failed.
THere are other ownership/sustainability models worthy of consideration.
Two bigger fish to fry: 1) spectrum as a finite commodity or property.

Two basic points need to be emphasized: the definition of a municipal project, and the range of other options that most cities have not even considered.

And that’s the real game – determining the truth and the opportunity for public interest.

1) true muni efforts
2) other options
3) terms of success

Two immediate points have to be made clear: first, we have to make a distinction between vendor-contracted city-wide wireless Internet franchises and true municipal wireless Internet. Second, we have to also recognize that there are other options, such as community and non-profit driven projects.

The ordering here is not hierarchic or sequential.

Dream big and dream small, but let your dreams progress to the act: do something.

First things first…

But fundamentally, you have to decide the civic purposes of your network before you determine the terms of success or failure.

Community Wireless Networking was somewhat eclipsed as cities were heavily wooed by vendors of networks, and for the most part this phenomenon remains largely unknown to the general public. Briefly stated – the community wireless movement is vibrant and growing.

These are the closing words of George, recipe a hunter from the South who has just spent 30 Days with a group of Animal Rights activists. It’s a beautiful story. It’s what reality tv should be.

I’m really struck by the notion of immersion in a cultural setting – in the subcultures of our own society. The 30 Days series is great from that perspective and is doing us a “positive media” service.

This week has been odd for me. We still have so much polarization in our politics. Members of my extended family have views on the current election that are in stark contrast to my own and we haven’t been able to forge a sustained political dialogue that would be a basis for deliberation. That’s my higher ideal – dialogue that leads to deliberation. We need that first safe civil space however … a precondition to emergent deliberation where we really are working together to understand an issue… not debating in a winner take all modality where the end justifies the means.

Animal Rights is not the issue that wakes me up each day, case but the questions of the cruelty of our factory farming system and vivisection are a burden to my soul. I’m just as concerned about our inhumanity to each other, gynecologist but one thing is certain: this is not part of a beautiful society, this is beneath our human dignity, it debases all who are involved.

My bigger issue is how to be a better human being. I’ve got a long way to go. I’m ok with that, as long as I make progress, and others are with me.

I just caught this episode on Hulu. I don’t know how long Hulu keeps episodes available for those of us who will embed their video in a blog, but if it’s not here by the time you read this, blame them.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

THE TIME, link
view it is to be hoped, is gone by, when any defence would be necessary of the “liberty of the press” as one of the securities against corrupt or tyrannical government. No argument, we may suppose, can now be needed, against permitting a legislature or an executive, not identified in interest with the people, to prescribe opinions to them, and determine what doctrines or what arguments they shall be allowed to hear.

John Stuart Mill (1806–1873). On Liberty. 1869.

The State is neither the sole nor the principle threat to the Liberty of Thought and Discussion.

Is it unlikely that corporate media, focused on profit, often owned by or in ownership of conflicting economic interests will serve this function? What must change? The media must serve a public duty untainted by impulse to self-censor when truth must be spoken. Report. Let the people judge.

The people must show some spine if we are to be free.

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

If you follow the mainstream coverage of wireless Internet deployments, mind you would probably think the municipal model has failed. (Philly’s network is now terminated. Chicago stopped the process after 2 years of exploration and well into the RFP evaluation.)

The failure of the Municipal model is a myth. This myth runs counter to the common good, viagra 100mg and is entangled in a series of other myths, buy information pills misrepresentations and distractions.

Needless to say, communications and technology policy can be complex and arcane – the science and technology, the multi-tiered regulatory framework, the social dimensions of use and design and let’s not neglect the value of good timing. How is the public, or a public official to know when the public interest is well served? What are the right questions to ask? Where does a public administration begin? Where can a community group begin to inform itself and become a part of the process, perhaps driving the process?

In the interest of cutting the Gordion knot let’s get out the scissors: we’ve barely tried the municipal network, and for the most part, those efforts you have likely heard of don’t really qualify as municipal networks. Yes, it sure looks as though their model has failed, but it wasn’t a true municipal model, and we would be wrong to use the example of their failure as an argument against public deployment of networks.

What happened? In the states we typically proceed in the bass-ackwards regimented formation of policy antithetical to our civic ideals.

There are three factors that we have to get right when evolving communications or technology policy: purpose, technology, and ownership/sustainability model, in that order. My gloss on the typical pattern: a buzz is generated around a technology, and either administrations seek vendors or vendors seek out political leadership and a vision is crafted, largely predicated on vendor driven solutions. The technology is taken for granted, it’s the technology on hand and in stock. The ownership model is likewise taken for granted (mostly). Purpose comes last, unfortunately. All to often it’s a means of selling the network to constituencies rather than designing a response to their needs and interests. “Political will” is manufactured by bringing in constituencies who will benefit to varying degree. The language of Digital Inclusion was a tool to that end. It’s part of the attempt to get digital divide activists on board for the technology project … throw them a small bone, and they’ll be happy.

We’re not so naive any more.

We’re ready to dispel the myths and take the power to communicate back into our own hands.

In the interest of brevity (ahem)

Muni hasn’t failed.
THere are other ownership/sustainability models worthy of consideration.
Two bigger fish to fry: 1) spectrum as a finite commodity or property.

Two basic points need to be emphasized: the definition of a municipal project, and the range of other options that most cities have not even considered.

And that’s the real game – determining the truth and the opportunity for public interest.

1) true muni efforts
2) other options
3) terms of success

Two immediate points have to be made clear: first, we have to make a distinction between vendor-contracted city-wide wireless Internet franchises and true municipal wireless Internet. Second, we have to also recognize that there are other options, such as community and non-profit driven projects.

The ordering here is not hierarchic or sequential.

Dream big and dream small, but let your dreams progress to the act: do something.

First things first…

But fundamentally, you have to decide the civic purposes of your network before you determine the terms of success or failure.

Community Wireless Networking was somewhat eclipsed as cities were heavily wooed by vendors of networks, and for the most part this phenomenon remains largely unknown to the general public. Briefly stated – the community wireless movement is vibrant and growing.

These are the closing words of George, recipe a hunter from the South who has just spent 30 Days with a group of Animal Rights activists. It’s a beautiful story. It’s what reality tv should be.

I’m really struck by the notion of immersion in a cultural setting – in the subcultures of our own society. The 30 Days series is great from that perspective and is doing us a “positive media” service.

This week has been odd for me. We still have so much polarization in our politics. Members of my extended family have views on the current election that are in stark contrast to my own and we haven’t been able to forge a sustained political dialogue that would be a basis for deliberation. That’s my higher ideal – dialogue that leads to deliberation. We need that first safe civil space however … a precondition to emergent deliberation where we really are working together to understand an issue… not debating in a winner take all modality where the end justifies the means.

Animal Rights is not the issue that wakes me up each day, case but the questions of the cruelty of our factory farming system and vivisection are a burden to my soul. I’m just as concerned about our inhumanity to each other, gynecologist but one thing is certain: this is not part of a beautiful society, this is beneath our human dignity, it debases all who are involved.

My bigger issue is how to be a better human being. I’ve got a long way to go. I’m ok with that, as long as I make progress, and others are with me.

I just caught this episode on Hulu. I don’t know how long Hulu keeps episodes available for those of us who will embed their video in a blog, but if it’s not here by the time you read this, blame them.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

THE TIME, link
view it is to be hoped, is gone by, when any defence would be necessary of the “liberty of the press” as one of the securities against corrupt or tyrannical government. No argument, we may suppose, can now be needed, against permitting a legislature or an executive, not identified in interest with the people, to prescribe opinions to them, and determine what doctrines or what arguments they shall be allowed to hear.

John Stuart Mill (1806–1873). On Liberty. 1869.

The State is neither the sole nor the principle threat to the Liberty of Thought and Discussion.

Is it unlikely that corporate media, focused on profit, often owned by or in ownership of conflicting economic interests will serve this function? What must change? The media must serve a public duty untainted by impulse to self-censor when truth must be spoken. Report. Let the people judge.

The people must show some spine if we are to be free.

Bloggers, sanitary Environmentalists, symptoms Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s talent and m.o.

There’s so much more that I’d love to say. For the moment I just want to spread the positive media meme with the Free Geek Chicago story. They’ve done a great job with their video. I’d love to see the model expand throughout Chicago – or perhaps a network of practitioners around the Chicago Region who are in alignment with the FG values. With a steady supply of equipment perhaps the product range can be expanded … nodes for a wireless mesh network truly owned and run by the community, and media servers for NPOs or community groups – infrastructure for local community information and communication services – think Community Intranet!

We need to spark our collective imagination and share the vision. This is a path towards digital excellence in Chicago.

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

If you follow the mainstream coverage of wireless Internet deployments, mind you would probably think the municipal model has failed. (Philly’s network is now terminated. Chicago stopped the process after 2 years of exploration and well into the RFP evaluation.)

The failure of the Municipal model is a myth. This myth runs counter to the common good, viagra 100mg and is entangled in a series of other myths, buy information pills misrepresentations and distractions.

Needless to say, communications and technology policy can be complex and arcane – the science and technology, the multi-tiered regulatory framework, the social dimensions of use and design and let’s not neglect the value of good timing. How is the public, or a public official to know when the public interest is well served? What are the right questions to ask? Where does a public administration begin? Where can a community group begin to inform itself and become a part of the process, perhaps driving the process?

In the interest of cutting the Gordion knot let’s get out the scissors: we’ve barely tried the municipal network, and for the most part, those efforts you have likely heard of don’t really qualify as municipal networks. Yes, it sure looks as though their model has failed, but it wasn’t a true municipal model, and we would be wrong to use the example of their failure as an argument against public deployment of networks.

What happened? In the states we typically proceed in the bass-ackwards regimented formation of policy antithetical to our civic ideals.

There are three factors that we have to get right when evolving communications or technology policy: purpose, technology, and ownership/sustainability model, in that order. My gloss on the typical pattern: a buzz is generated around a technology, and either administrations seek vendors or vendors seek out political leadership and a vision is crafted, largely predicated on vendor driven solutions. The technology is taken for granted, it’s the technology on hand and in stock. The ownership model is likewise taken for granted (mostly). Purpose comes last, unfortunately. All to often it’s a means of selling the network to constituencies rather than designing a response to their needs and interests. “Political will” is manufactured by bringing in constituencies who will benefit to varying degree. The language of Digital Inclusion was a tool to that end. It’s part of the attempt to get digital divide activists on board for the technology project … throw them a small bone, and they’ll be happy.

We’re not so naive any more.

We’re ready to dispel the myths and take the power to communicate back into our own hands.

In the interest of brevity (ahem)

Muni hasn’t failed.
THere are other ownership/sustainability models worthy of consideration.
Two bigger fish to fry: 1) spectrum as a finite commodity or property.

Two basic points need to be emphasized: the definition of a municipal project, and the range of other options that most cities have not even considered.

And that’s the real game – determining the truth and the opportunity for public interest.

1) true muni efforts
2) other options
3) terms of success

Two immediate points have to be made clear: first, we have to make a distinction between vendor-contracted city-wide wireless Internet franchises and true municipal wireless Internet. Second, we have to also recognize that there are other options, such as community and non-profit driven projects.

The ordering here is not hierarchic or sequential.

Dream big and dream small, but let your dreams progress to the act: do something.

First things first…

But fundamentally, you have to decide the civic purposes of your network before you determine the terms of success or failure.

Community Wireless Networking was somewhat eclipsed as cities were heavily wooed by vendors of networks, and for the most part this phenomenon remains largely unknown to the general public. Briefly stated – the community wireless movement is vibrant and growing.

These are the closing words of George, recipe a hunter from the South who has just spent 30 Days with a group of Animal Rights activists. It’s a beautiful story. It’s what reality tv should be.

I’m really struck by the notion of immersion in a cultural setting – in the subcultures of our own society. The 30 Days series is great from that perspective and is doing us a “positive media” service.

This week has been odd for me. We still have so much polarization in our politics. Members of my extended family have views on the current election that are in stark contrast to my own and we haven’t been able to forge a sustained political dialogue that would be a basis for deliberation. That’s my higher ideal – dialogue that leads to deliberation. We need that first safe civil space however … a precondition to emergent deliberation where we really are working together to understand an issue… not debating in a winner take all modality where the end justifies the means.

Animal Rights is not the issue that wakes me up each day, case but the questions of the cruelty of our factory farming system and vivisection are a burden to my soul. I’m just as concerned about our inhumanity to each other, gynecologist but one thing is certain: this is not part of a beautiful society, this is beneath our human dignity, it debases all who are involved.

My bigger issue is how to be a better human being. I’ve got a long way to go. I’m ok with that, as long as I make progress, and others are with me.

I just caught this episode on Hulu. I don’t know how long Hulu keeps episodes available for those of us who will embed their video in a blog, but if it’s not here by the time you read this, blame them.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

THE TIME, link
view it is to be hoped, is gone by, when any defence would be necessary of the “liberty of the press” as one of the securities against corrupt or tyrannical government. No argument, we may suppose, can now be needed, against permitting a legislature or an executive, not identified in interest with the people, to prescribe opinions to them, and determine what doctrines or what arguments they shall be allowed to hear.

John Stuart Mill (1806–1873). On Liberty. 1869.

The State is neither the sole nor the principle threat to the Liberty of Thought and Discussion.

Is it unlikely that corporate media, focused on profit, often owned by or in ownership of conflicting economic interests will serve this function? What must change? The media must serve a public duty untainted by impulse to self-censor when truth must be spoken. Report. Let the people judge.

The people must show some spine if we are to be free.

Bloggers, sanitary Environmentalists, symptoms Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s talent and m.o.

There’s so much more that I’d love to say. For the moment I just want to spread the positive media meme with the Free Geek Chicago story. They’ve done a great job with their video. I’d love to see the model expand throughout Chicago – or perhaps a network of practitioners around the Chicago Region who are in alignment with the FG values. With a steady supply of equipment perhaps the product range can be expanded … nodes for a wireless mesh network truly owned and run by the community, and media servers for NPOs or community groups – infrastructure for local community information and communication services – think Community Intranet!

We need to spark our collective imagination and share the vision. This is a path towards digital excellence in Chicago.

Bloggers, viagra Environmentalists, order Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

If you follow the mainstream coverage of wireless Internet deployments, mind you would probably think the municipal model has failed. (Philly’s network is now terminated. Chicago stopped the process after 2 years of exploration and well into the RFP evaluation.)

The failure of the Municipal model is a myth. This myth runs counter to the common good, viagra 100mg and is entangled in a series of other myths, buy information pills misrepresentations and distractions.

Needless to say, communications and technology policy can be complex and arcane – the science and technology, the multi-tiered regulatory framework, the social dimensions of use and design and let’s not neglect the value of good timing. How is the public, or a public official to know when the public interest is well served? What are the right questions to ask? Where does a public administration begin? Where can a community group begin to inform itself and become a part of the process, perhaps driving the process?

In the interest of cutting the Gordion knot let’s get out the scissors: we’ve barely tried the municipal network, and for the most part, those efforts you have likely heard of don’t really qualify as municipal networks. Yes, it sure looks as though their model has failed, but it wasn’t a true municipal model, and we would be wrong to use the example of their failure as an argument against public deployment of networks.

What happened? In the states we typically proceed in the bass-ackwards regimented formation of policy antithetical to our civic ideals.

There are three factors that we have to get right when evolving communications or technology policy: purpose, technology, and ownership/sustainability model, in that order. My gloss on the typical pattern: a buzz is generated around a technology, and either administrations seek vendors or vendors seek out political leadership and a vision is crafted, largely predicated on vendor driven solutions. The technology is taken for granted, it’s the technology on hand and in stock. The ownership model is likewise taken for granted (mostly). Purpose comes last, unfortunately. All to often it’s a means of selling the network to constituencies rather than designing a response to their needs and interests. “Political will” is manufactured by bringing in constituencies who will benefit to varying degree. The language of Digital Inclusion was a tool to that end. It’s part of the attempt to get digital divide activists on board for the technology project … throw them a small bone, and they’ll be happy.

We’re not so naive any more.

We’re ready to dispel the myths and take the power to communicate back into our own hands.

In the interest of brevity (ahem)

Muni hasn’t failed.
THere are other ownership/sustainability models worthy of consideration.
Two bigger fish to fry: 1) spectrum as a finite commodity or property.

Two basic points need to be emphasized: the definition of a municipal project, and the range of other options that most cities have not even considered.

And that’s the real game – determining the truth and the opportunity for public interest.

1) true muni efforts
2) other options
3) terms of success

Two immediate points have to be made clear: first, we have to make a distinction between vendor-contracted city-wide wireless Internet franchises and true municipal wireless Internet. Second, we have to also recognize that there are other options, such as community and non-profit driven projects.

The ordering here is not hierarchic or sequential.

Dream big and dream small, but let your dreams progress to the act: do something.

First things first…

But fundamentally, you have to decide the civic purposes of your network before you determine the terms of success or failure.

Community Wireless Networking was somewhat eclipsed as cities were heavily wooed by vendors of networks, and for the most part this phenomenon remains largely unknown to the general public. Briefly stated – the community wireless movement is vibrant and growing.

These are the closing words of George, recipe a hunter from the South who has just spent 30 Days with a group of Animal Rights activists. It’s a beautiful story. It’s what reality tv should be.

I’m really struck by the notion of immersion in a cultural setting – in the subcultures of our own society. The 30 Days series is great from that perspective and is doing us a “positive media” service.

This week has been odd for me. We still have so much polarization in our politics. Members of my extended family have views on the current election that are in stark contrast to my own and we haven’t been able to forge a sustained political dialogue that would be a basis for deliberation. That’s my higher ideal – dialogue that leads to deliberation. We need that first safe civil space however … a precondition to emergent deliberation where we really are working together to understand an issue… not debating in a winner take all modality where the end justifies the means.

Animal Rights is not the issue that wakes me up each day, case but the questions of the cruelty of our factory farming system and vivisection are a burden to my soul. I’m just as concerned about our inhumanity to each other, gynecologist but one thing is certain: this is not part of a beautiful society, this is beneath our human dignity, it debases all who are involved.

My bigger issue is how to be a better human being. I’ve got a long way to go. I’m ok with that, as long as I make progress, and others are with me.

I just caught this episode on Hulu. I don’t know how long Hulu keeps episodes available for those of us who will embed their video in a blog, but if it’s not here by the time you read this, blame them.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

THE TIME, link
view it is to be hoped, is gone by, when any defence would be necessary of the “liberty of the press” as one of the securities against corrupt or tyrannical government. No argument, we may suppose, can now be needed, against permitting a legislature or an executive, not identified in interest with the people, to prescribe opinions to them, and determine what doctrines or what arguments they shall be allowed to hear.

John Stuart Mill (1806–1873). On Liberty. 1869.

The State is neither the sole nor the principle threat to the Liberty of Thought and Discussion.

Is it unlikely that corporate media, focused on profit, often owned by or in ownership of conflicting economic interests will serve this function? What must change? The media must serve a public duty untainted by impulse to self-censor when truth must be spoken. Report. Let the people judge.

The people must show some spine if we are to be free.

Bloggers, sanitary Environmentalists, symptoms Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s talent and m.o.

There’s so much more that I’d love to say. For the moment I just want to spread the positive media meme with the Free Geek Chicago story. They’ve done a great job with their video. I’d love to see the model expand throughout Chicago – or perhaps a network of practitioners around the Chicago Region who are in alignment with the FG values. With a steady supply of equipment perhaps the product range can be expanded … nodes for a wireless mesh network truly owned and run by the community, and media servers for NPOs or community groups – infrastructure for local community information and communication services – think Community Intranet!

We need to spark our collective imagination and share the vision. This is a path towards digital excellence in Chicago.

Bloggers, viagra Environmentalists, order Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s

Bloggers, women’s health Environmentalists, Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s talent and m.o.

There’s so much more that I’d love to say. For the moment I just want to spread the positive media meme with the Free Geek Chicago story. They’ve done a great job with their video. I’d love to see the model expand throughout Chicago – or perhaps a network of practitioners around the Chicago Region who are in alignment with the FG values. With a steady supply of equipment perhaps the product range can be expanded … nodes for a wireless mesh network truly owned and run by the community, and media servers for NPOs or community groups – infrastructure for local community information and communication services – think Community Intranet!

We need to spark our collective imagination and share the vision. This is a path towards digital excellence in Chicago.

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

If you follow the mainstream coverage of wireless Internet deployments, mind you would probably think the municipal model has failed. (Philly’s network is now terminated. Chicago stopped the process after 2 years of exploration and well into the RFP evaluation.)

The failure of the Municipal model is a myth. This myth runs counter to the common good, viagra 100mg and is entangled in a series of other myths, buy information pills misrepresentations and distractions.

Needless to say, communications and technology policy can be complex and arcane – the science and technology, the multi-tiered regulatory framework, the social dimensions of use and design and let’s not neglect the value of good timing. How is the public, or a public official to know when the public interest is well served? What are the right questions to ask? Where does a public administration begin? Where can a community group begin to inform itself and become a part of the process, perhaps driving the process?

In the interest of cutting the Gordion knot let’s get out the scissors: we’ve barely tried the municipal network, and for the most part, those efforts you have likely heard of don’t really qualify as municipal networks. Yes, it sure looks as though their model has failed, but it wasn’t a true municipal model, and we would be wrong to use the example of their failure as an argument against public deployment of networks.

What happened? In the states we typically proceed in the bass-ackwards regimented formation of policy antithetical to our civic ideals.

There are three factors that we have to get right when evolving communications or technology policy: purpose, technology, and ownership/sustainability model, in that order. My gloss on the typical pattern: a buzz is generated around a technology, and either administrations seek vendors or vendors seek out political leadership and a vision is crafted, largely predicated on vendor driven solutions. The technology is taken for granted, it’s the technology on hand and in stock. The ownership model is likewise taken for granted (mostly). Purpose comes last, unfortunately. All to often it’s a means of selling the network to constituencies rather than designing a response to their needs and interests. “Political will” is manufactured by bringing in constituencies who will benefit to varying degree. The language of Digital Inclusion was a tool to that end. It’s part of the attempt to get digital divide activists on board for the technology project … throw them a small bone, and they’ll be happy.

We’re not so naive any more.

We’re ready to dispel the myths and take the power to communicate back into our own hands.

In the interest of brevity (ahem)

Muni hasn’t failed.
THere are other ownership/sustainability models worthy of consideration.
Two bigger fish to fry: 1) spectrum as a finite commodity or property.

Two basic points need to be emphasized: the definition of a municipal project, and the range of other options that most cities have not even considered.

And that’s the real game – determining the truth and the opportunity for public interest.

1) true muni efforts
2) other options
3) terms of success

Two immediate points have to be made clear: first, we have to make a distinction between vendor-contracted city-wide wireless Internet franchises and true municipal wireless Internet. Second, we have to also recognize that there are other options, such as community and non-profit driven projects.

The ordering here is not hierarchic or sequential.

Dream big and dream small, but let your dreams progress to the act: do something.

First things first…

But fundamentally, you have to decide the civic purposes of your network before you determine the terms of success or failure.

Community Wireless Networking was somewhat eclipsed as cities were heavily wooed by vendors of networks, and for the most part this phenomenon remains largely unknown to the general public. Briefly stated – the community wireless movement is vibrant and growing.

These are the closing words of George, recipe a hunter from the South who has just spent 30 Days with a group of Animal Rights activists. It’s a beautiful story. It’s what reality tv should be.

I’m really struck by the notion of immersion in a cultural setting – in the subcultures of our own society. The 30 Days series is great from that perspective and is doing us a “positive media” service.

This week has been odd for me. We still have so much polarization in our politics. Members of my extended family have views on the current election that are in stark contrast to my own and we haven’t been able to forge a sustained political dialogue that would be a basis for deliberation. That’s my higher ideal – dialogue that leads to deliberation. We need that first safe civil space however … a precondition to emergent deliberation where we really are working together to understand an issue… not debating in a winner take all modality where the end justifies the means.

Animal Rights is not the issue that wakes me up each day, case but the questions of the cruelty of our factory farming system and vivisection are a burden to my soul. I’m just as concerned about our inhumanity to each other, gynecologist but one thing is certain: this is not part of a beautiful society, this is beneath our human dignity, it debases all who are involved.

My bigger issue is how to be a better human being. I’ve got a long way to go. I’m ok with that, as long as I make progress, and others are with me.

I just caught this episode on Hulu. I don’t know how long Hulu keeps episodes available for those of us who will embed their video in a blog, but if it’s not here by the time you read this, blame them.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

THE TIME, link
view it is to be hoped, is gone by, when any defence would be necessary of the “liberty of the press” as one of the securities against corrupt or tyrannical government. No argument, we may suppose, can now be needed, against permitting a legislature or an executive, not identified in interest with the people, to prescribe opinions to them, and determine what doctrines or what arguments they shall be allowed to hear.

John Stuart Mill (1806–1873). On Liberty. 1869.

The State is neither the sole nor the principle threat to the Liberty of Thought and Discussion.

Is it unlikely that corporate media, focused on profit, often owned by or in ownership of conflicting economic interests will serve this function? What must change? The media must serve a public duty untainted by impulse to self-censor when truth must be spoken. Report. Let the people judge.

The people must show some spine if we are to be free.

Bloggers, sanitary Environmentalists, symptoms Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s talent and m.o.

There’s so much more that I’d love to say. For the moment I just want to spread the positive media meme with the Free Geek Chicago story. They’ve done a great job with their video. I’d love to see the model expand throughout Chicago – or perhaps a network of practitioners around the Chicago Region who are in alignment with the FG values. With a steady supply of equipment perhaps the product range can be expanded … nodes for a wireless mesh network truly owned and run by the community, and media servers for NPOs or community groups – infrastructure for local community information and communication services – think Community Intranet!

We need to spark our collective imagination and share the vision. This is a path towards digital excellence in Chicago.

Bloggers, viagra Environmentalists, order Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s

Bloggers, women’s health Environmentalists, Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s talent and m.o.

There’s so much more that I’d love to say. For the moment I just want to spread the positive media meme with the Free Geek Chicago story. They’ve done a great job with their video. I’d love to see the model expand throughout Chicago – or perhaps a network of practitioners around the Chicago Region who are in alignment with the FG values. With a steady supply of equipment perhaps the product range can be expanded … nodes for a wireless mesh network truly owned and run by the community, and media servers for NPOs or community groups – infrastructure for local community information and communication services – think Community Intranet!

We need to spark our collective imagination and share the vision. This is a path towards digital excellence in Chicago.

Bloggers, healing Environmentalists, Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s talent and m.o.

There’s so much more that I’d love to say. For the moment I just want to spread the positive media meme with the Free Geek Chicago story. They’ve done a great job with their video. I’d love to see the model expand throughout Chicago – or perhaps a network of practitioners around the Chicago Region who are in alignment with the FG values. With a steady supply of equipment perhaps the product range can be expanded … nodes for a wireless mesh network truly owned and run by the community, and media servers for NPOs or community groups – infrastructure for local community information and communication services – think Community Intranet!

We need to spark our collective imagination and share the vision. This is a path towards digital excellence in Chicago.

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

If you follow the mainstream coverage of wireless Internet deployments, mind you would probably think the municipal model has failed. (Philly’s network is now terminated. Chicago stopped the process after 2 years of exploration and well into the RFP evaluation.)

The failure of the Municipal model is a myth. This myth runs counter to the common good, viagra 100mg and is entangled in a series of other myths, buy information pills misrepresentations and distractions.

Needless to say, communications and technology policy can be complex and arcane – the science and technology, the multi-tiered regulatory framework, the social dimensions of use and design and let’s not neglect the value of good timing. How is the public, or a public official to know when the public interest is well served? What are the right questions to ask? Where does a public administration begin? Where can a community group begin to inform itself and become a part of the process, perhaps driving the process?

In the interest of cutting the Gordion knot let’s get out the scissors: we’ve barely tried the municipal network, and for the most part, those efforts you have likely heard of don’t really qualify as municipal networks. Yes, it sure looks as though their model has failed, but it wasn’t a true municipal model, and we would be wrong to use the example of their failure as an argument against public deployment of networks.

What happened? In the states we typically proceed in the bass-ackwards regimented formation of policy antithetical to our civic ideals.

There are three factors that we have to get right when evolving communications or technology policy: purpose, technology, and ownership/sustainability model, in that order. My gloss on the typical pattern: a buzz is generated around a technology, and either administrations seek vendors or vendors seek out political leadership and a vision is crafted, largely predicated on vendor driven solutions. The technology is taken for granted, it’s the technology on hand and in stock. The ownership model is likewise taken for granted (mostly). Purpose comes last, unfortunately. All to often it’s a means of selling the network to constituencies rather than designing a response to their needs and interests. “Political will” is manufactured by bringing in constituencies who will benefit to varying degree. The language of Digital Inclusion was a tool to that end. It’s part of the attempt to get digital divide activists on board for the technology project … throw them a small bone, and they’ll be happy.

We’re not so naive any more.

We’re ready to dispel the myths and take the power to communicate back into our own hands.

In the interest of brevity (ahem)

Muni hasn’t failed.
THere are other ownership/sustainability models worthy of consideration.
Two bigger fish to fry: 1) spectrum as a finite commodity or property.

Two basic points need to be emphasized: the definition of a municipal project, and the range of other options that most cities have not even considered.

And that’s the real game – determining the truth and the opportunity for public interest.

1) true muni efforts
2) other options
3) terms of success

Two immediate points have to be made clear: first, we have to make a distinction between vendor-contracted city-wide wireless Internet franchises and true municipal wireless Internet. Second, we have to also recognize that there are other options, such as community and non-profit driven projects.

The ordering here is not hierarchic or sequential.

Dream big and dream small, but let your dreams progress to the act: do something.

First things first…

But fundamentally, you have to decide the civic purposes of your network before you determine the terms of success or failure.

Community Wireless Networking was somewhat eclipsed as cities were heavily wooed by vendors of networks, and for the most part this phenomenon remains largely unknown to the general public. Briefly stated – the community wireless movement is vibrant and growing.

These are the closing words of George, recipe a hunter from the South who has just spent 30 Days with a group of Animal Rights activists. It’s a beautiful story. It’s what reality tv should be.

I’m really struck by the notion of immersion in a cultural setting – in the subcultures of our own society. The 30 Days series is great from that perspective and is doing us a “positive media” service.

This week has been odd for me. We still have so much polarization in our politics. Members of my extended family have views on the current election that are in stark contrast to my own and we haven’t been able to forge a sustained political dialogue that would be a basis for deliberation. That’s my higher ideal – dialogue that leads to deliberation. We need that first safe civil space however … a precondition to emergent deliberation where we really are working together to understand an issue… not debating in a winner take all modality where the end justifies the means.

Animal Rights is not the issue that wakes me up each day, case but the questions of the cruelty of our factory farming system and vivisection are a burden to my soul. I’m just as concerned about our inhumanity to each other, gynecologist but one thing is certain: this is not part of a beautiful society, this is beneath our human dignity, it debases all who are involved.

My bigger issue is how to be a better human being. I’ve got a long way to go. I’m ok with that, as long as I make progress, and others are with me.

I just caught this episode on Hulu. I don’t know how long Hulu keeps episodes available for those of us who will embed their video in a blog, but if it’s not here by the time you read this, blame them.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

THE TIME, link
view it is to be hoped, is gone by, when any defence would be necessary of the “liberty of the press” as one of the securities against corrupt or tyrannical government. No argument, we may suppose, can now be needed, against permitting a legislature or an executive, not identified in interest with the people, to prescribe opinions to them, and determine what doctrines or what arguments they shall be allowed to hear.

John Stuart Mill (1806–1873). On Liberty. 1869.

The State is neither the sole nor the principle threat to the Liberty of Thought and Discussion.

Is it unlikely that corporate media, focused on profit, often owned by or in ownership of conflicting economic interests will serve this function? What must change? The media must serve a public duty untainted by impulse to self-censor when truth must be spoken. Report. Let the people judge.

The people must show some spine if we are to be free.

Bloggers, sanitary Environmentalists, symptoms Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s talent and m.o.

There’s so much more that I’d love to say. For the moment I just want to spread the positive media meme with the Free Geek Chicago story. They’ve done a great job with their video. I’d love to see the model expand throughout Chicago – or perhaps a network of practitioners around the Chicago Region who are in alignment with the FG values. With a steady supply of equipment perhaps the product range can be expanded … nodes for a wireless mesh network truly owned and run by the community, and media servers for NPOs or community groups – infrastructure for local community information and communication services – think Community Intranet!

We need to spark our collective imagination and share the vision. This is a path towards digital excellence in Chicago.

Bloggers, viagra Environmentalists, order Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s

Bloggers, women’s health Environmentalists, Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s talent and m.o.

There’s so much more that I’d love to say. For the moment I just want to spread the positive media meme with the Free Geek Chicago story. They’ve done a great job with their video. I’d love to see the model expand throughout Chicago – or perhaps a network of practitioners around the Chicago Region who are in alignment with the FG values. With a steady supply of equipment perhaps the product range can be expanded … nodes for a wireless mesh network truly owned and run by the community, and media servers for NPOs or community groups – infrastructure for local community information and communication services – think Community Intranet!

We need to spark our collective imagination and share the vision. This is a path towards digital excellence in Chicago.

Bloggers, healing Environmentalists, Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s talent and m.o.

There’s so much more that I’d love to say. For the moment I just want to spread the positive media meme with the Free Geek Chicago story. They’ve done a great job with their video. I’d love to see the model expand throughout Chicago – or perhaps a network of practitioners around the Chicago Region who are in alignment with the FG values. With a steady supply of equipment perhaps the product range can be expanded … nodes for a wireless mesh network truly owned and run by the community, and media servers for NPOs or community groups – infrastructure for local community information and communication services – think Community Intranet!

We need to spark our collective imagination and share the vision. This is a path towards digital excellence in Chicago.

One Web Day is almost upon us! (Monday, epilepsy September 22) What are we doing in Chicago to celebrate? Among other things the Future of Music Coalition has organized a workshop at the Old Town School of Folk Music, phlebologist and I’ll be speaking on the Policy Overview panel. Come say hello!

What's the Future for Musicians?

Here’s more info:

Today’s music landscape is filled with both excitement and foreboding. With so many new technologies and ways to promote and distribute music, how do performers, composers, songwriters and independent labels know how to participate, who to trust, and what is most effective?

Future of Music Coalition — a national non-profit that seeks a bright future for musicians and fans — is organizing a musician education workshop at the Old Town School of Folk Music on September 22, from noon to 7PM. The “What’s the Future for Musicians?” seminar will provide musicians, songwriters, independent label owners and music fans with practical advice about a range of internet-based promotion and distribution options, how to navigate the health insurance landscape, the importance of open internet structures and how copyright law and business models affect musician compensation. Breakout sessions will give attendees a chance to interact with the experts on the latest developments in music, technology and policy. The forum is a great opportunity to network with other musicians while getting informed on topical issues.

Admission is $25, though a limited number of musician scholarships are also available.

Event page:
http://www.futureofmusic.org/events/chicago08/index.cfm

Registration:
https://www.futureofmusic.org/events/chicago08/regform.cfm

Musician Scholarships:
http://www.futureofmusic.org/events/chicago08/scholarshipinfo.cfm

What else is happening for One Web Day?

As part of Chicago’s NetTuesdays Meetups we’ve been recording interviews with people from the Chicago NPO & Tech Sector – hope to have some of those up by Monday!

Free Geeking Chicago Style

Sunday, August 31st, 2008

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

What’s the deeper formula to “be the change” when you feel frustrated by mainstream media and their handling of presidential politics – and politics in general? Where can we direct our efforts to promote meaningful civic discourse? We need a space dedicated to that purpose and for which we share responsibility. What will serve as town square in the digital era?

The e-democracy project offers a model for supporting local civic discourse online. We take it as given that online efforts don’t replace other modes of interaction in civil society – they are meant to support and enhance civic life. We also take it as given that the digital divide and disparities in tech literacy and local Internet connectivity/accessibility remain a problem that should get more serious attention.

In Chicago I have been involved in numerous discussions around using technology to improve our quality of life, link our capacity to work together for a better city, drug and to deal with the pressing issues of our day. I’ve come to learn that many efforts fail when groups involved fail to remain open and inviting to others and when the impetus to control an initiative or block it if you can’t control it holds sway.

No one person or group can own a movement, nor can they assert themselves as the legitimate venue for public discourse. Others will feel excluded or will sense that if they support the effort they are bolstering someone else’s constituency.

What is needed? Venues and Resources that are truly held in common and over which we feel stewardship and responsibility, not ownership or control. With that in mind, I am working with others towards advancing the e-Democracy model within Chicago area. I invite you to join me in this effort.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

What’s the deeper formula to “be the change” when you feel frustrated by mainstream media and their handling of presidential politics – and politics in general? Where can we direct our efforts to promote meaningful civic discourse? We need a space dedicated to that purpose and for which we share responsibility. What will serve as town square in the digital era?

The e-democracy project offers a model for supporting local civic discourse online. We take it as given that online efforts don’t replace other modes of interaction in civil society – they are meant to support and enhance civic life. We also take it as given that the digital divide and disparities in tech literacy and local Internet connectivity/accessibility remain a problem that should get more serious attention.

In Chicago I have been involved in numerous discussions around using technology to improve our quality of life, link our capacity to work together for a better city, drug and to deal with the pressing issues of our day. I’ve come to learn that many efforts fail when groups involved fail to remain open and inviting to others and when the impetus to control an initiative or block it if you can’t control it holds sway.

No one person or group can own a movement, nor can they assert themselves as the legitimate venue for public discourse. Others will feel excluded or will sense that if they support the effort they are bolstering someone else’s constituency.

What is needed? Venues and Resources that are truly held in common and over which we feel stewardship and responsibility, not ownership or control. With that in mind, I am working with others towards advancing the e-Democracy model within Chicago area. I invite you to join me in this effort.

What’s the deeper formula to “be the change” when you feel frustrated by mainstream media and their handling of presidential politics – and politics in general? Where can we direct our efforts to promote meaningful civic discourse? We need a space dedicated to that purpose and for which we share responsibility. What will serve as town square in the digital era?

The e-democracy project offers a model for supporting local civic discourse online. We take it as given that online efforts don’t replace other modes of interaction in civil society – they are meant to support and enhance civic life. We also take it as given that the digital divide and disparities in tech literacy and local Internet connectivity/accessibility remain a problem that should get more serious attention.

In Chicago I have been involved in numerous discussions around using technology to improve our quality of life, melanoma our capacity to work together for a better city, cheapest and to deal with the pressing issues of our day. I’ve come to learn that many efforts fall short when groups involved fail to remain open and inviting to others and when the impetus to control an initiative or block it if you can’t control it holds sway.

No one person or group can own a movement, nor can they assert themselves as the legitimate venue for public discourse. Others will feel excluded or will sense that if they support the effort they are bolstering someone else’s constituency.

What is needed? Venues and Resources that are truly held in common and over which we feel stewardship and responsibility, not ownership or control. With that in mind, I am working with others towards advancing the e-Democracy model within Chicago area. I invite you to join me in this effort.

This model is the embodiment of a fair amount of wisdom. In the local issues forums certain guidelines and constraints are necessary to safeguard the spirit and intention of civic space. Participants are expected to identify with a real name; everyone is limited to two posts a day; and topics are focused on our lives within the polity, from a local frame. In terms of technology – there is a sensible bridging of modes of online interaction. members can participate through email, through the web forum or they can keep up with the discussion via RSS feeds. None of these technologies are new, but they aren’t exactly going away either. They are widespread in use, and they represent a framework that can be built upon.

I know there is probably temptation for the civic minded tech group to roll your own, or perhaps make use of “groups” tools on well-known sites. I thought a lot about those options myself. It was easier for me to dismiss the latter as not being the best strategy for an effort intending to foster civic discourse. First, there is the issue of whether the public/commercial site will persist over the long haul or whether it’s policies might fundamentally change. Second there is the general issue of “joining” a site and submitting oneself to the terms of use under which your personal data is regarded as an asset they might trade upon, and where you are the object of marketing which relates directly to the third issue I’ll address in relation to this … maintaining the civic discourse in a space free from commercial speech (i.e. advertising).

I haven’t addressed the issues around “rolling your own” civic forum … certainly with the diffusion of open source content management systems such as Drupal, setting up a forum is relatively easy.

Establishing a successful online community isn’t as easy. Earlier I brought up the notion of “ownership” and perceptions of constituency building and branding opportunities that come up when a group launches efforts like this. We bypass those pitfalls in promoting the e-Democracy model. We’re not making a claim of ownership over the initiative – except in broadest sense of collective ownership. The other issue is that you are going to have to make a lot of design choices, and while exploring the technical issues is a topic of interest to me and many in the circles I frequent, it’s going to delay the effort, and the group may drop the project or worse the effort may fork based on ego or conflicting tech-philosophy.

Who’s with me?

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

If you follow the mainstream coverage of wireless Internet deployments, mind you would probably think the municipal model has failed. (Philly’s network is now terminated. Chicago stopped the process after 2 years of exploration and well into the RFP evaluation.)

The failure of the Municipal model is a myth. This myth runs counter to the common good, viagra 100mg and is entangled in a series of other myths, buy information pills misrepresentations and distractions.

Needless to say, communications and technology policy can be complex and arcane – the science and technology, the multi-tiered regulatory framework, the social dimensions of use and design and let’s not neglect the value of good timing. How is the public, or a public official to know when the public interest is well served? What are the right questions to ask? Where does a public administration begin? Where can a community group begin to inform itself and become a part of the process, perhaps driving the process?

In the interest of cutting the Gordion knot let’s get out the scissors: we’ve barely tried the municipal network, and for the most part, those efforts you have likely heard of don’t really qualify as municipal networks. Yes, it sure looks as though their model has failed, but it wasn’t a true municipal model, and we would be wrong to use the example of their failure as an argument against public deployment of networks.

What happened? In the states we typically proceed in the bass-ackwards regimented formation of policy antithetical to our civic ideals.

There are three factors that we have to get right when evolving communications or technology policy: purpose, technology, and ownership/sustainability model, in that order. My gloss on the typical pattern: a buzz is generated around a technology, and either administrations seek vendors or vendors seek out political leadership and a vision is crafted, largely predicated on vendor driven solutions. The technology is taken for granted, it’s the technology on hand and in stock. The ownership model is likewise taken for granted (mostly). Purpose comes last, unfortunately. All to often it’s a means of selling the network to constituencies rather than designing a response to their needs and interests. “Political will” is manufactured by bringing in constituencies who will benefit to varying degree. The language of Digital Inclusion was a tool to that end. It’s part of the attempt to get digital divide activists on board for the technology project … throw them a small bone, and they’ll be happy.

We’re not so naive any more.

We’re ready to dispel the myths and take the power to communicate back into our own hands.

In the interest of brevity (ahem)

Muni hasn’t failed.
THere are other ownership/sustainability models worthy of consideration.
Two bigger fish to fry: 1) spectrum as a finite commodity or property.

Two basic points need to be emphasized: the definition of a municipal project, and the range of other options that most cities have not even considered.

And that’s the real game – determining the truth and the opportunity for public interest.

1) true muni efforts
2) other options
3) terms of success

Two immediate points have to be made clear: first, we have to make a distinction between vendor-contracted city-wide wireless Internet franchises and true municipal wireless Internet. Second, we have to also recognize that there are other options, such as community and non-profit driven projects.

The ordering here is not hierarchic or sequential.

Dream big and dream small, but let your dreams progress to the act: do something.

First things first…

But fundamentally, you have to decide the civic purposes of your network before you determine the terms of success or failure.

Community Wireless Networking was somewhat eclipsed as cities were heavily wooed by vendors of networks, and for the most part this phenomenon remains largely unknown to the general public. Briefly stated – the community wireless movement is vibrant and growing.

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

If you follow the mainstream coverage of wireless Internet deployments, mind you would probably think the municipal model has failed. (Philly’s network is now terminated. Chicago stopped the process after 2 years of exploration and well into the RFP evaluation.)

The failure of the Municipal model is a myth. This myth runs counter to the common good, viagra 100mg and is entangled in a series of other myths, buy information pills misrepresentations and distractions.

Needless to say, communications and technology policy can be complex and arcane – the science and technology, the multi-tiered regulatory framework, the social dimensions of use and design and let’s not neglect the value of good timing. How is the public, or a public official to know when the public interest is well served? What are the right questions to ask? Where does a public administration begin? Where can a community group begin to inform itself and become a part of the process, perhaps driving the process?

In the interest of cutting the Gordion knot let’s get out the scissors: we’ve barely tried the municipal network, and for the most part, those efforts you have likely heard of don’t really qualify as municipal networks. Yes, it sure looks as though their model has failed, but it wasn’t a true municipal model, and we would be wrong to use the example of their failure as an argument against public deployment of networks.

What happened? In the states we typically proceed in the bass-ackwards regimented formation of policy antithetical to our civic ideals.

There are three factors that we have to get right when evolving communications or technology policy: purpose, technology, and ownership/sustainability model, in that order. My gloss on the typical pattern: a buzz is generated around a technology, and either administrations seek vendors or vendors seek out political leadership and a vision is crafted, largely predicated on vendor driven solutions. The technology is taken for granted, it’s the technology on hand and in stock. The ownership model is likewise taken for granted (mostly). Purpose comes last, unfortunately. All to often it’s a means of selling the network to constituencies rather than designing a response to their needs and interests. “Political will” is manufactured by bringing in constituencies who will benefit to varying degree. The language of Digital Inclusion was a tool to that end. It’s part of the attempt to get digital divide activists on board for the technology project … throw them a small bone, and they’ll be happy.

We’re not so naive any more.

We’re ready to dispel the myths and take the power to communicate back into our own hands.

In the interest of brevity (ahem)

Muni hasn’t failed.
THere are other ownership/sustainability models worthy of consideration.
Two bigger fish to fry: 1) spectrum as a finite commodity or property.

Two basic points need to be emphasized: the definition of a municipal project, and the range of other options that most cities have not even considered.

And that’s the real game – determining the truth and the opportunity for public interest.

1) true muni efforts
2) other options
3) terms of success

Two immediate points have to be made clear: first, we have to make a distinction between vendor-contracted city-wide wireless Internet franchises and true municipal wireless Internet. Second, we have to also recognize that there are other options, such as community and non-profit driven projects.

The ordering here is not hierarchic or sequential.

Dream big and dream small, but let your dreams progress to the act: do something.

First things first…

But fundamentally, you have to decide the civic purposes of your network before you determine the terms of success or failure.

Community Wireless Networking was somewhat eclipsed as cities were heavily wooed by vendors of networks, and for the most part this phenomenon remains largely unknown to the general public. Briefly stated – the community wireless movement is vibrant and growing.

These are the closing words of George, recipe a hunter from the South who has just spent 30 Days with a group of Animal Rights activists. It’s a beautiful story. It’s what reality tv should be.

I’m really struck by the notion of immersion in a cultural setting – in the subcultures of our own society. The 30 Days series is great from that perspective and is doing us a “positive media” service.

This week has been odd for me. We still have so much polarization in our politics. Members of my extended family have views on the current election that are in stark contrast to my own and we haven’t been able to forge a sustained political dialogue that would be a basis for deliberation. That’s my higher ideal – dialogue that leads to deliberation. We need that first safe civil space however … a precondition to emergent deliberation where we really are working together to understand an issue… not debating in a winner take all modality where the end justifies the means.

Animal Rights is not the issue that wakes me up each day, case but the questions of the cruelty of our factory farming system and vivisection are a burden to my soul. I’m just as concerned about our inhumanity to each other, gynecologist but one thing is certain: this is not part of a beautiful society, this is beneath our human dignity, it debases all who are involved.

My bigger issue is how to be a better human being. I’ve got a long way to go. I’m ok with that, as long as I make progress, and others are with me.

I just caught this episode on Hulu. I don’t know how long Hulu keeps episodes available for those of us who will embed their video in a blog, but if it’s not here by the time you read this, blame them.

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

If you follow the mainstream coverage of wireless Internet deployments, mind you would probably think the municipal model has failed. (Philly’s network is now terminated. Chicago stopped the process after 2 years of exploration and well into the RFP evaluation.)

The failure of the Municipal model is a myth. This myth runs counter to the common good, viagra 100mg and is entangled in a series of other myths, buy information pills misrepresentations and distractions.

Needless to say, communications and technology policy can be complex and arcane – the science and technology, the multi-tiered regulatory framework, the social dimensions of use and design and let’s not neglect the value of good timing. How is the public, or a public official to know when the public interest is well served? What are the right questions to ask? Where does a public administration begin? Where can a community group begin to inform itself and become a part of the process, perhaps driving the process?

In the interest of cutting the Gordion knot let’s get out the scissors: we’ve barely tried the municipal network, and for the most part, those efforts you have likely heard of don’t really qualify as municipal networks. Yes, it sure looks as though their model has failed, but it wasn’t a true municipal model, and we would be wrong to use the example of their failure as an argument against public deployment of networks.

What happened? In the states we typically proceed in the bass-ackwards regimented formation of policy antithetical to our civic ideals.

There are three factors that we have to get right when evolving communications or technology policy: purpose, technology, and ownership/sustainability model, in that order. My gloss on the typical pattern: a buzz is generated around a technology, and either administrations seek vendors or vendors seek out political leadership and a vision is crafted, largely predicated on vendor driven solutions. The technology is taken for granted, it’s the technology on hand and in stock. The ownership model is likewise taken for granted (mostly). Purpose comes last, unfortunately. All to often it’s a means of selling the network to constituencies rather than designing a response to their needs and interests. “Political will” is manufactured by bringing in constituencies who will benefit to varying degree. The language of Digital Inclusion was a tool to that end. It’s part of the attempt to get digital divide activists on board for the technology project … throw them a small bone, and they’ll be happy.

We’re not so naive any more.

We’re ready to dispel the myths and take the power to communicate back into our own hands.

In the interest of brevity (ahem)

Muni hasn’t failed.
THere are other ownership/sustainability models worthy of consideration.
Two bigger fish to fry: 1) spectrum as a finite commodity or property.

Two basic points need to be emphasized: the definition of a municipal project, and the range of other options that most cities have not even considered.

And that’s the real game – determining the truth and the opportunity for public interest.

1) true muni efforts
2) other options
3) terms of success

Two immediate points have to be made clear: first, we have to make a distinction between vendor-contracted city-wide wireless Internet franchises and true municipal wireless Internet. Second, we have to also recognize that there are other options, such as community and non-profit driven projects.

The ordering here is not hierarchic or sequential.

Dream big and dream small, but let your dreams progress to the act: do something.

First things first…

But fundamentally, you have to decide the civic purposes of your network before you determine the terms of success or failure.

Community Wireless Networking was somewhat eclipsed as cities were heavily wooed by vendors of networks, and for the most part this phenomenon remains largely unknown to the general public. Briefly stated – the community wireless movement is vibrant and growing.

These are the closing words of George, recipe a hunter from the South who has just spent 30 Days with a group of Animal Rights activists. It’s a beautiful story. It’s what reality tv should be.

I’m really struck by the notion of immersion in a cultural setting – in the subcultures of our own society. The 30 Days series is great from that perspective and is doing us a “positive media” service.

This week has been odd for me. We still have so much polarization in our politics. Members of my extended family have views on the current election that are in stark contrast to my own and we haven’t been able to forge a sustained political dialogue that would be a basis for deliberation. That’s my higher ideal – dialogue that leads to deliberation. We need that first safe civil space however … a precondition to emergent deliberation where we really are working together to understand an issue… not debating in a winner take all modality where the end justifies the means.

Animal Rights is not the issue that wakes me up each day, case but the questions of the cruelty of our factory farming system and vivisection are a burden to my soul. I’m just as concerned about our inhumanity to each other, gynecologist but one thing is certain: this is not part of a beautiful society, this is beneath our human dignity, it debases all who are involved.

My bigger issue is how to be a better human being. I’ve got a long way to go. I’m ok with that, as long as I make progress, and others are with me.

I just caught this episode on Hulu. I don’t know how long Hulu keeps episodes available for those of us who will embed their video in a blog, but if it’s not here by the time you read this, blame them.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

If you follow the mainstream coverage of wireless Internet deployments, mind you would probably think the municipal model has failed. (Philly’s network is now terminated. Chicago stopped the process after 2 years of exploration and well into the RFP evaluation.)

The failure of the Municipal model is a myth. This myth runs counter to the common good, viagra 100mg and is entangled in a series of other myths, buy information pills misrepresentations and distractions.

Needless to say, communications and technology policy can be complex and arcane – the science and technology, the multi-tiered regulatory framework, the social dimensions of use and design and let’s not neglect the value of good timing. How is the public, or a public official to know when the public interest is well served? What are the right questions to ask? Where does a public administration begin? Where can a community group begin to inform itself and become a part of the process, perhaps driving the process?

In the interest of cutting the Gordion knot let’s get out the scissors: we’ve barely tried the municipal network, and for the most part, those efforts you have likely heard of don’t really qualify as municipal networks. Yes, it sure looks as though their model has failed, but it wasn’t a true municipal model, and we would be wrong to use the example of their failure as an argument against public deployment of networks.

What happened? In the states we typically proceed in the bass-ackwards regimented formation of policy antithetical to our civic ideals.

There are three factors that we have to get right when evolving communications or technology policy: purpose, technology, and ownership/sustainability model, in that order. My gloss on the typical pattern: a buzz is generated around a technology, and either administrations seek vendors or vendors seek out political leadership and a vision is crafted, largely predicated on vendor driven solutions. The technology is taken for granted, it’s the technology on hand and in stock. The ownership model is likewise taken for granted (mostly). Purpose comes last, unfortunately. All to often it’s a means of selling the network to constituencies rather than designing a response to their needs and interests. “Political will” is manufactured by bringing in constituencies who will benefit to varying degree. The language of Digital Inclusion was a tool to that end. It’s part of the attempt to get digital divide activists on board for the technology project … throw them a small bone, and they’ll be happy.

We’re not so naive any more.

We’re ready to dispel the myths and take the power to communicate back into our own hands.

In the interest of brevity (ahem)

Muni hasn’t failed.
THere are other ownership/sustainability models worthy of consideration.
Two bigger fish to fry: 1) spectrum as a finite commodity or property.

Two basic points need to be emphasized: the definition of a municipal project, and the range of other options that most cities have not even considered.

And that’s the real game – determining the truth and the opportunity for public interest.

1) true muni efforts
2) other options
3) terms of success

Two immediate points have to be made clear: first, we have to make a distinction between vendor-contracted city-wide wireless Internet franchises and true municipal wireless Internet. Second, we have to also recognize that there are other options, such as community and non-profit driven projects.

The ordering here is not hierarchic or sequential.

Dream big and dream small, but let your dreams progress to the act: do something.

First things first…

But fundamentally, you have to decide the civic purposes of your network before you determine the terms of success or failure.

Community Wireless Networking was somewhat eclipsed as cities were heavily wooed by vendors of networks, and for the most part this phenomenon remains largely unknown to the general public. Briefly stated – the community wireless movement is vibrant and growing.

These are the closing words of George, recipe a hunter from the South who has just spent 30 Days with a group of Animal Rights activists. It’s a beautiful story. It’s what reality tv should be.

I’m really struck by the notion of immersion in a cultural setting – in the subcultures of our own society. The 30 Days series is great from that perspective and is doing us a “positive media” service.

This week has been odd for me. We still have so much polarization in our politics. Members of my extended family have views on the current election that are in stark contrast to my own and we haven’t been able to forge a sustained political dialogue that would be a basis for deliberation. That’s my higher ideal – dialogue that leads to deliberation. We need that first safe civil space however … a precondition to emergent deliberation where we really are working together to understand an issue… not debating in a winner take all modality where the end justifies the means.

Animal Rights is not the issue that wakes me up each day, case but the questions of the cruelty of our factory farming system and vivisection are a burden to my soul. I’m just as concerned about our inhumanity to each other, gynecologist but one thing is certain: this is not part of a beautiful society, this is beneath our human dignity, it debases all who are involved.

My bigger issue is how to be a better human being. I’ve got a long way to go. I’m ok with that, as long as I make progress, and others are with me.

I just caught this episode on Hulu. I don’t know how long Hulu keeps episodes available for those of us who will embed their video in a blog, but if it’s not here by the time you read this, blame them.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

THE TIME, link
view it is to be hoped, is gone by, when any defence would be necessary of the “liberty of the press” as one of the securities against corrupt or tyrannical government. No argument, we may suppose, can now be needed, against permitting a legislature or an executive, not identified in interest with the people, to prescribe opinions to them, and determine what doctrines or what arguments they shall be allowed to hear.

John Stuart Mill (1806–1873). On Liberty. 1869.

The State is neither the sole nor the principle threat to the Liberty of Thought and Discussion.

Is it unlikely that corporate media, focused on profit, often owned by or in ownership of conflicting economic interests will serve this function? What must change? The media must serve a public duty untainted by impulse to self-censor when truth must be spoken. Report. Let the people judge.

The people must show some spine if we are to be free.

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.

If you follow the mainstream coverage of wireless Internet deployments, mind you would probably think the municipal model has failed. (Philly’s network is now terminated. Chicago stopped the process after 2 years of exploration and well into the RFP evaluation.)

The failure of the Municipal model is a myth. This myth runs counter to the common good, viagra 100mg and is entangled in a series of other myths, buy information pills misrepresentations and distractions.

Needless to say, communications and technology policy can be complex and arcane – the science and technology, the multi-tiered regulatory framework, the social dimensions of use and design and let’s not neglect the value of good timing. How is the public, or a public official to know when the public interest is well served? What are the right questions to ask? Where does a public administration begin? Where can a community group begin to inform itself and become a part of the process, perhaps driving the process?

In the interest of cutting the Gordion knot let’s get out the scissors: we’ve barely tried the municipal network, and for the most part, those efforts you have likely heard of don’t really qualify as municipal networks. Yes, it sure looks as though their model has failed, but it wasn’t a true municipal model, and we would be wrong to use the example of their failure as an argument against public deployment of networks.

What happened? In the states we typically proceed in the bass-ackwards regimented formation of policy antithetical to our civic ideals.

There are three factors that we have to get right when evolving communications or technology policy: purpose, technology, and ownership/sustainability model, in that order. My gloss on the typical pattern: a buzz is generated around a technology, and either administrations seek vendors or vendors seek out political leadership and a vision is crafted, largely predicated on vendor driven solutions. The technology is taken for granted, it’s the technology on hand and in stock. The ownership model is likewise taken for granted (mostly). Purpose comes last, unfortunately. All to often it’s a means of selling the network to constituencies rather than designing a response to their needs and interests. “Political will” is manufactured by bringing in constituencies who will benefit to varying degree. The language of Digital Inclusion was a tool to that end. It’s part of the attempt to get digital divide activists on board for the technology project … throw them a small bone, and they’ll be happy.

We’re not so naive any more.

We’re ready to dispel the myths and take the power to communicate back into our own hands.

In the interest of brevity (ahem)

Muni hasn’t failed.
THere are other ownership/sustainability models worthy of consideration.
Two bigger fish to fry: 1) spectrum as a finite commodity or property.

Two basic points need to be emphasized: the definition of a municipal project, and the range of other options that most cities have not even considered.

And that’s the real game – determining the truth and the opportunity for public interest.

1) true muni efforts
2) other options
3) terms of success

Two immediate points have to be made clear: first, we have to make a distinction between vendor-contracted city-wide wireless Internet franchises and true municipal wireless Internet. Second, we have to also recognize that there are other options, such as community and non-profit driven projects.

The ordering here is not hierarchic or sequential.

Dream big and dream small, but let your dreams progress to the act: do something.

First things first…

But fundamentally, you have to decide the civic purposes of your network before you determine the terms of success or failure.

Community Wireless Networking was somewhat eclipsed as cities were heavily wooed by vendors of networks, and for the most part this phenomenon remains largely unknown to the general public. Briefly stated – the community wireless movement is vibrant and growing.

These are the closing words of George, recipe a hunter from the South who has just spent 30 Days with a group of Animal Rights activists. It’s a beautiful story. It’s what reality tv should be.

I’m really struck by the notion of immersion in a cultural setting – in the subcultures of our own society. The 30 Days series is great from that perspective and is doing us a “positive media” service.

This week has been odd for me. We still have so much polarization in our politics. Members of my extended family have views on the current election that are in stark contrast to my own and we haven’t been able to forge a sustained political dialogue that would be a basis for deliberation. That’s my higher ideal – dialogue that leads to deliberation. We need that first safe civil space however … a precondition to emergent deliberation where we really are working together to understand an issue… not debating in a winner take all modality where the end justifies the means.

Animal Rights is not the issue that wakes me up each day, case but the questions of the cruelty of our factory farming system and vivisection are a burden to my soul. I’m just as concerned about our inhumanity to each other, gynecologist but one thing is certain: this is not part of a beautiful society, this is beneath our human dignity, it debases all who are involved.

My bigger issue is how to be a better human being. I’ve got a long way to go. I’m ok with that, as long as I make progress, and others are with me.

I just caught this episode on Hulu. I don’t know how long Hulu keeps episodes available for those of us who will embed their video in a blog, but if it’s not here by the time you read this, blame them.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

I’d like to see the media get back to reporting as opposed to pretending to think for us, pharmacist especially when they get the thinking wrong and ignore the bigger news sitting alongside and staring us in the face.

The story of the weekend was Obama’s supposed flip-flop on public campaign finance. I think we use the phrase too loosely. Changing your mind, buy information pills or reversing direction/decision isn’t an adequate definition. Necessary, visit this but not sufficient.

Fish flip flop when they are out of their element, politicians when they’re spineless – not when their decision is grounded in a position of strength and consistent with their higher values. So, I’d like to upgrade the definition to a reversal followed by subsequent reversal(s), or a reversal mainly employed by “leaders” to keep supporters or to keep one’s self in place when it was clear one’s position wasn’t grounded to begin with.

A strategic choice can not be a flip flop. It’s a clear decision.

Further: You’re going to have to go a little deeper to decide if something is hypocritical. It’s absurd to label someone hypocritical when their values are consistent. How much more must be said?

Obama has eschewed PAC money and has a tremendously broad base of financial support from none other than the public. This is the campaign that has drawn a bright red line between big money and the public. If Obama’s people change their mind and accept big money contributions or unleash 527s … then I’ll be disappointed, angry and feel betrayed as will millions of others. That would be hypocrisy and would undercut the values this campaign has established. That wouldn’t be a flip flop either, that would be a blunder, plain and stupid. Flip flops are about not knowing which way the wind was blowing ahead of time, not how strong the wind would be.

I’ll say it again, I’m not into hero worship or idolatry, but I also am not going to accept false logic. I’m not an apologist for the campaign but rabid punditry deserves a flogging.

Lastly, this strategic decision is not an attack on public campaign finance. I feel clear that Obama supports the principle of public campaign finance. It doesn’t mean one has to take it. It doesn’t mean he isn’t right to state bluntly that it is broken. It clearly is broken when the other candidate can illegally flip flop – i.e. reverse himself and reverse himself again – and the laws remain unenforced. McCain’s campaign is breaking the law and the law and order types are nowhere to be found, the media is fairly silent and worse offering us some red hering and it appears democrats are not pressing the issue, or meekly at best.

So, yes, it’s broken and it makes sense to opt out if the other candidate won’t be held accountable to the rules and you can effectively run a campaign grounded in your principles . It needs to be fixed, and it needs to be there for future candidates as an option.

Strategy and grounded campaigning are not opportunistic or hypocritical, and it’s not a flip flop.

Apply logic before speaking. Do a double dose before pontificating. Check some facts. Prioritize facts.

The people have to make up their mind whether the character of the campaign matters. I think it does. The character of the campaign reflects the character of the candidate. We’re deciding the character of discourse we’ll settle for, and the character of governance that we want.

Making little of nothing isn’t a sign of character.

THE TIME, link
view it is to be hoped, is gone by, when any defence would be necessary of the “liberty of the press” as one of the securities against corrupt or tyrannical government. No argument, we may suppose, can now be needed, against permitting a legislature or an executive, not identified in interest with the people, to prescribe opinions to them, and determine what doctrines or what arguments they shall be allowed to hear.

John Stuart Mill (1806–1873). On Liberty. 1869.

The State is neither the sole nor the principle threat to the Liberty of Thought and Discussion.

Is it unlikely that corporate media, focused on profit, often owned by or in ownership of conflicting economic interests will serve this function? What must change? The media must serve a public duty untainted by impulse to self-censor when truth must be spoken. Report. Let the people judge.

The people must show some spine if we are to be free.

Bloggers, sanitary Environmentalists, symptoms Techies – I invite you to help spread the word about Free Geek Chicago.

The Free Geek concept is widespread – Portland Oregon the flagship – and well regarded in the Open Source world.

Free Geek Chicago is perhaps unique among Chicago computer recyclers/refurbishers in their endeavor to maximize the life of discarded computer components. Watch the video, let them speak for themselves. Then think about what you can do to further the causes that align under the Free Geek Chicago mission.

Free Geek Chicago needs your support. They need reliable streams of discarded computer equipment. They need us to get the word out. Bring in your old equipment, yes … but perhaps there is more that can be done – for example, you can inquire as to where and how your company’s equipment is handled. If it is picked up for recycling or refurbishing … look into how hard they work to keep the materials out of the waste stream. You may be surprised. Not all recyclers or refurbishers are equal. There are hidden costs to everything … the best way to keep equipment out of landfills foreign or domestic is to increase their useful lives. Such utility has three aspectswe should keep in mind – the functioning of the equipment, the functional (digital) literacy of the person seeking to make use of that equipment (and the harmony of their purposes) and not least – the community or network of support that bridges the physicality of the hardware and the human. This is Free Geek’s talent and m.o.

There’s so much more that I’d love to say. For the moment I just want to spread the positive media meme with the Free Geek Chicago story. They’ve done a great job with their video. I’d love to see the model expand throughout Chicago – or perhaps a network of practitioners around the Chicago Region who are in alignment with the FG values. With a steady supply of equipment perhaps the product range can be expanded … nodes for a wireless mesh network truly owned and run by the community, and media servers for NPOs or community groups – infrastructure for local community information and communication services – think Community Intranet!

We need to spark our collective imagination and share the vision. This is a path towards digital excellence in Chicago.

Countdown to One Web Day, Chicago!

Saturday, June 14th, 2008

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

What’s the deeper formula to “be the change” when you feel frustrated by mainstream media and their handling of presidential politics – and politics in general? Where can we direct our efforts to promote meaningful civic discourse? We need a space dedicated to that purpose and for which we share responsibility. What will serve as town square in the digital era?

The e-democracy project offers a model for supporting local civic discourse online. We take it as given that online efforts don’t replace other modes of interaction in civil society – they are meant to support and enhance civic life. We also take it as given that the digital divide and disparities in tech literacy and local Internet connectivity/accessibility remain a problem that should get more serious attention.

In Chicago I have been involved in numerous discussions around using technology to improve our quality of life, link our capacity to work together for a better city, drug and to deal with the pressing issues of our day. I’ve come to learn that many efforts fail when groups involved fail to remain open and inviting to others and when the impetus to control an initiative or block it if you can’t control it holds sway.

No one person or group can own a movement, nor can they assert themselves as the legitimate venue for public discourse. Others will feel excluded or will sense that if they support the effort they are bolstering someone else’s constituency.

What is needed? Venues and Resources that are truly held in common and over which we feel stewardship and responsibility, not ownership or control. With that in mind, I am working with others towards advancing the e-Democracy model within Chicago area. I invite you to join me in this effort.

Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.
Today I had the fortune of joining a group of civic entrepreneurs advancing data collaboration in Illinois. They introduced me to the 8 Principles of Open Government Data drafted in December 2007 at a California Summit. The Illinois effort – IDEA – Illinois Data Exchange Affiliates is concerned to promote civic engagement and better governance through collaborative data practices among non-profits/civic sector, gastritis research & planning efforts and all layers of government. This is where Digital Excellence meets eGovernment.

got data?

If Chicago is a world-class city in a leading region of the nation, unhealthy what are we waiting for? If we are ready to embrace the information age I don’t know what could make us more globally competitive than to remove the artificial barriers to information exchange in city and county. I hear tell there is a committee on data sharing among departments of Chicago city government. I look forward to hearing what progress they have made thus far and how aggressive they intend to be with regard to unfolding a new era in accountability and transparency. Someone, ping Hardik.

Good data is about feedback. Feedback regulates an organism or process. Here it would inform individual choice and guide regional planning. We all know the Mayor loves to have city services on the ball when it comes to potholes and attention to the visible amenities. These eight principles would allow Chicago to set new benchmarks for service delivery and quality of life. You don’t have to be an XML geek to grok this.

Open Government Data Principles

Government data shall be considered open if it is made public in a way that complies with the principles below:

1. Complete
All public data is made available. Public data is data that is not subject to valid privacy, security or privilege limitations.

2. Primary
Data is as collected at the source, with the highest possible level of granularity, not in aggregate or modified forms.

3. Timely

Data is made available as quickly as necessary to preserve the value of the data.

4. Accessible
Data is available to the widest range of users for the widest range of purposes.

5. Machine processable
Data is reasonably structured to allow automated processing.

6. Non-discriminatory
Data is available to anyone, with no requirement of registration.

7. Non-proprietary

Data is available in a format over which no entity has exclusive control.

8. License-free
Data is not subject to any copyright, patent, trademark or trade secret regulation. Reasonable privacy, security and privilege restrictions may be allowed.

Compliance must be reviewable.

as I become I, site I say Thou

Martin Buber expressed this point many ways. Our human nature is grounded in an intersubjectivity where we deepen our humanity only with the other.

Sepp Hasslberger: The Gift Economy – Receiving stimulates giving

I’m pointing you to Sepp’s blog entry, sovaldi sale but using that as a spring board to my own musings.

It’s better to give than to receive? We’ve heard that, viagra and we can contemplate its meaning. We’ve also heard that there is nobility in receiving a gift well, with respect, humility, or better: generosity. We’re recipients of the gifts of nature, of life. How well have we received them? Receiving well involves stewardship – it involves valuing the act of generosity and the gift received.

We’ve been gifted a gift economy. Have we received it well? Two aspects of reception here … one is bound in attitude, relation and perception – the other in our stewardship as recipients.

When we hear about the gift economy, do we give it it’s proper due? When we receive from the greater gift economy, are we thankful enough to participate with generosity ourselves.

There are ways to receive with generosity, we should endeavor to live that way.

Chicago proposes to become one of the Greenest cities in the world. Meanwhile, salve we’ve been in a holding pattern with respect to addressing the digital divide let along promoting digital excellence citywide. Chicago’s Digital Access Alliance placed environmentalism among the core platform. we need to be innovative with regard to green IT. It’s not just recycling and refurbishing. There’s some interesting thinking up in Canada. Here’s a set of links:

http://green-broadband.blogspot.com/

http://free-fiber-to-the-home.blogspot.com/

I’m thinking ahead for a moment. Knowledge workers could more readily work from home with reliable high speed communications networks, allowing audio/video, shared desktops, multimedia conference calling… and any number of undeveloped applications. None of this is new. What would be new would be commitment to network capacity and workforce policies that encouraged this. Instead we’re looking at the networks as a consumption driven amenity, and even there the public doesn’t get much bandwidth bang (or reliability) for the buck.

Think also what we’d be doing for neighborhood economies if more people worked locally?

What is historical consciousness? When does history touch our lives? How does the historical life of the nation become tangible for any one of us? These questions are difficult to answer in the abstract.

When Michelle Obama expressed her newly emergent pride in the country many were offended. But, pills the backlash of those who took offense is perniciously wrongheaded. We need to move beyond bombastic pride and unqualified emotionalism. It’s ridiculous to parse the language of another person’s inner experience of national identity while we willfully ignore the contradictions in our own relation or expression thereof. We have no standing to make such judgment.

It’s a matter of mote and timber in the historical mind’s eye, troche for no institution, gastritis no social relation can be accorded unconditional approbation. That is what our national identity suggests to me. Patriotism is a willingness to challenge the country when it does wrong, out of love. Glossing over inconvenient facts obstructs growth, leaving us in shadow. There is much to question in our present and in our past. We should embrace those with the will to question, raise dialogue and foster civic deliberation on matters afflicting the human condition.

Today I read a piece recounting many points in American history for which the only point of pride may be in the widespread hope or desire that we have since overcome those attitudes and behavior. It’s not clear to me that we have. There are many signs to the contrary.

Where does hope live? Hope is an active relation to the dream. The American project continues to unfold. Our best days are not behind us. Our living up to the civic principles we espouse requires questioning our selves and challenging false pride (as well as self-loathing).

Generations after Dr. King’s brutal murder we still aspire to a post-racial society, and we endeavor to live the dream he eloquently expressed. This is grounded in the wisdom that there is but one race. Some will say that the post-racial element of the dream is a denial of reality. I understand the point they are trying to make, even if I reject the categorical language of race in favor of a more nuanced dynamic of ethnic processes and social constructions of identity.

If I restated the case, our hopes would be realized in a post-racist society … a subtle difference, perhaps. We’re not calling for a denial of the past, or of present difference, but rather for a new relation to both.

This is not about homogeneity, it is about a deeper respect for histories and differences. We (as nation and as species) are the repository of a multitude of histories and we must be willing to face the darkness in our history, in a narrative whereby we collectively and continually rise above ignorance and prejudice. Attaining a degree of historical consciousness we no longer have an excuse to deny our past, nor to deny that which we are party to in the present. It is incumbent upon us to continue to grow, and to bring up those generations who follow in this attitude, that they may likewise live in active relation to humanity’s higher nature.

Once we begin to take maturity seriously, we will get down to the business of maturation.

We’ll not impugn others for their faith or for their doubts in the nation or in humanity, we’ll give them reason to be hopeful. Take pride in working towards the dream with others, don’t take excessive pride in the past.

Today (Thursday) the Knight Center of Digital Excellence was launched in Akron, stuff Ohio. I am deeply invested in the vision and language of Digital Excellence, cheap and I hope the Center lives up to it’s name. Some words of wisdom for those undertaking this mission:

The path towards excellence starts with purpose, decease and not with technology. Be clear in your purpose, be strong in resolve, be prepared to fall and rise again. Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

The Chicago Digital Access Alliance put this vision before our City, a vision of great ambition. We echo the historic Chicago mantra: Make no small plans. Has Chicago missed an opportunity? No. We have not. Not if we yet take up the challenge and establish what has been called for: A Digital Excellence Trust.

The wind left our sails when the Chicago wireless plans were put on hold. It was fortuitous that the vendor-driven segmented-technology model fell through, but the call for Digital Excellence didn’t have to stop there. We’re the windy city and our model was never tied to wireless technology. We have Olympic aspirations and Greenest-city-in-the-world goals. We know that these are deeply tied to a vision of excellence.

Excellence is our noble human calling. We’re not one of the Knight communities. How will we rise here and now to the challenge of digital excellence? Will we stir the soul of the city? Will we stir the soul of the nation?

This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, neurosurgeon worth checking out!
Miguel Guhlin of Texas offered his reaction to my recent post on the Path towards Excellence.

First let’s highlight the quote he’s reacting to:

Digital is a word that often gets in the way: Strive first and always for human excellence and towards our higher individual and collective purposes. Excellence is a matter of character.

Miguel responds:

I fundamentally disagree with this approach. We need to strive towards digitally-enhanced human excellence from the beginning, case not strive first and always for human excellence THEN consider something else. Although sometimes it’s helpful to start with traditional tools–like Emily’s approach to bookmarking in the video below, moving us from traditional bookmarks to “social bookmarking” online–when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first. Otherwise, it never happens.

My inner pragmatist senses that there is a confusion as to what constitutes excellence, and the nature of the hierarchy between technology and human purposes. I am confident that an extended dialogue on these questions would be instructive and I invite Miguel (and others) to explore the matter with me.

There appears to be a temporal division in Miguel’s interpretation of my view… as a sequential ordering he objects to striving first and always for human excellence then considering something else (in this case technology). he argues that we have to start with technology or it never happens… the “it” being “digitally-enhanced human excellence” I take it.

At the surface, it looks like we’re in disagreement. I’d like to dig deeper.

I’ve written extensively on digital excellence, but from a moral point of view, we must always put technology in service to human purposes – individual and collective. This is a moral and conceptual ordering. In planning and undertaking our journey towards excellence it is a matter of intention and commitment to higher purpose. We embody excellence in the striving for excellence, and that is the only way to get there (which is an unending journey, anyway).

Starting certainly implies a sequence will follow, but we always have to start where we are, and it’s good to gain clarity on what that means. From that view, starting has many aspects: intention, situation, vision.

Miguel asserts that “when designing things from scratch, you have to start with technology first.” However, design implies an intention, a purpose. We have to get clarity on our purpose. I argue elsewhere (on numerous occasions) for dropping the digital. Digital stands in for new technology generally. I’m not anti-technology by any means. But in standing in for technology, it largely implies “new and better” … and obscures critical reflection on the term it sets out to modify. Whether the second term is “divide” or “literacy” or “inclusion” or “excellence” (or any other term) we would do well to pay more attention to the second term. When speaking of the digital divide, it’s merely the latest iteration and manifestation of longstanding social inequalities. We speak of digital literacy, we cannot ignore the higher faculties of reasoning implied in literacy. When we speak of digital inclusion – do we make as strenuous an effort as require to promote a generally inclusive society? Shall we address digital excellence any differently?

(The same argument applies to novel formulations of “e” (and i) …. eGovernment, eChicago.)

Don’t get me wrong. I am not anti-technology. (Nor am I an uncritical booster of technology for it’s own sake.) I am not against deep technological design and deliberation or potentially substantial investments in technology when it makes sense. But what guides a technical decision if not purpose?

The character of our pursuit is essential to excellence. The distinction between human excellence and digitally-enhanced human excellence is lost on me. It’s not a matter of first the one, and then (maybe) the other. It’s not a hierarchy of needs. It’s a hierarchy of purpose and values. If our aims determine technical means we will not delay. We havent delayed. We’re embedded already in the technosphere. Our society and identity is infused with technology and has been since time immemorial. The digital epoch merely takes it to new levels or extremes. The sense of an extreme is a sign of the tension of our adjustment, but the question is how we (continually) humanize our institutions and our technological capacities. We won’t ignore technology, we’ll affirm our proper relation to technology. Technology is but a means. We must take care in choice of means, surely, but we must be more deliberate in determining our purposes.

Are we still in fundamental disagreement?

What’s the deeper formula to “be the change” when you feel frustrated by mainstream media and their handling of presidential politics – and politics in general? Where can we direct our efforts to promote meaningful civic discourse? We need a space dedicated to that purpose and for which we share responsibility. What will serve as town square in the digital era?

The e-democracy project offers a model for supporting local civic discourse online. We take it as given that online efforts don’t replace other modes of interaction in civil society – they are meant to support and enhance civic life. We also take it as given that the digital divide and disparities in tech literacy and local Internet connectivity/accessibility remain a problem that should get more serious attention.

In Chicago I have been involved in numerous discussions around using technology to improve our quality of life, link our capacity to work together for a better city, drug and to deal with the pressing issues of our day. I’ve come to learn that many efforts fail when groups involved fail to remain open and inviting to others and when the impetus to control an initiative or block it if you can’t control it holds sway.

No one person or group can own a movement, nor can they assert themselves as the legitimate venue for public discourse. Others will feel excluded or will sense that if they support the effort they are bolstering someone else’s constituency.

What is needed? Venues and Resources that are truly held in common and over which we feel stewardship and responsibility, not ownership or control. With that in mind, I am working with others towards advancing the e-Democracy model within Chicago area. I invite you to join me in this effort.

What’s the deeper formula to “be the change” when you feel frustrated by mainstream media and their handling of presidential politics – and politics in general? Where can we direct our efforts to promote meaningful civic discourse? We need a space dedicated to that purpose and for which we share responsibility. What will serve as town square in the digital era?

The e-democracy project offers a model for supporting local civic discourse online. We take it as given that online efforts don’t replace other modes of interaction in civil society – they are meant to support and enhance civic life. We also take it as given that the digital divide and disparities in tech literacy and local Internet connectivity/accessibility remain a problem that should get more serious attention.

In Chicago I have been involved in numerous discussions around using technology to improve our quality of life, melanoma our capacity to work together for a better city, cheapest and to deal with the pressing issues of our day. I’ve come to learn that many efforts fall short when groups involved fail to remain open and inviting to others and when the impetus to control an initiative or block it if you can’t control it holds sway.

No one person or group can own a movement, nor can they assert themselves as the legitimate venue for public discourse. Others will feel excluded or will sense that if they support the effort they are bolstering someone else’s constituency.

What is needed? Venues and Resources that are truly held in common and over which we feel stewardship and responsibility, not ownership or control. With that in mind, I am working with others towards advancing the e-Democracy model within Chicago area. I invite you to join me in this effort.

This model is the embodiment of a fair amount of wisdom. In the local issues forums certain guidelines and constraints are necessary to safeguard the spirit and intention of civic space. Participants are expected to identify with a real name; everyone is limited to two posts a day; and topics are focused on our lives within the polity, from a local frame. In terms of technology – there is a sensible bridging of modes of online interaction. members can participate through email, through the web forum or they can keep up with the discussion via RSS feeds. None of these technologies are new, but they aren’t exactly going away either. They are widespread in use, and they represent a framework that can be built upon.

I know there is probably temptation for the civic minded tech group to roll your own, or perhaps make use of “groups” tools on well-known sites. I thought a lot about those options myself. It was easier for me to dismiss the latter as not being the best strategy for an effort intending to foster civic discourse. First, there is the issue of whether the public/commercial site will persist over the long haul or whether it’s policies might fundamentally change. Second there is the general issue of “joining” a site and submitting oneself to the terms of use under which your personal data is regarded as an asset they might trade upon, and where you are the object of marketing which relates directly to the third issue I’ll address in relation to this … maintaining the civic discourse in a space free from commercial speech (i.e. advertising).

I haven’t addressed the issues around “rolling your own” civic forum … certainly with the diffusion of open source content management systems such as Drupal, setting up a forum is relatively easy.

Establishing a successful online community isn’t as easy. Earlier I brought up the notion of “ownership” and perceptions of constituency building and branding opportunities that come up when a group launches efforts like this. We bypass those pitfalls in promoting the e-Democracy model. We’re not making a claim of ownership over the initiative – except in broadest sense of collective ownership. The other issue is that you are going to have to make a lot of design choices, and while exploring the technical issues is a topic of interest to me and many in the circles I frequent, it’s going to delay the effort, and the group may drop the project or worse the effort may fork based on ego or conflicting tech-philosophy.

Who’s with me?

We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
We’re making progress towards e-Democracy in Chicago. We’ve got a great steering committee in formation, nurse and and we’re eager to recruit participants to the Chicago Region Civic Forum. We’re relying on Twin Cities based e-democracy.org for hosting and for their local issues forum platform (based on groupserver). Our forum won’t go live until we reach a critical mass of subscribers.

We’re using their platform for several reasons … we’re committed to a civic discourse on an open source, prescription neutral platform, so that no group or person in Chicago would feel “ownership” (or exclusion) except in the sense of a common, collective ownership and responsibility.

We also like the model, generally. The e-democracy project has been going strong for more than a decade, and continues to expand. It’s built on web technologies familiar to everyone: email and browser, yet also allows room for web 2.0 growth with RSS/XML feeds. The e-democracy forums pay a good deal of attention to the social dimensions of online communities, and have established sensible policies and practices for a healthy community. A clear and explicit policy is important.

The list/forum is open to the public, for the purposes of local civic discourse. Participants are expected to register under their real name, to conduct themselves with civility and generosity of spirit and to focus on issues of pertinence to the Chicago region. We’re all restricted to two posts per day so that no one person can dominate the discourse and so that participants don’t feel overwhelmed by excessive traffic. We’re all busy people, and we respect each other’s time and commitment to improving life in our city.

Feel free to register now… and let me know if you have any problems! We’re still testing some things.

This should take you to a registration page for the Chicago Region Civic Forum on the e-democracy site. Remember, we won’t be live right away, but you will be the first to know when we are!
OneWebDay

Susan Crawford, rehabilitation founder of One Web Day made a strong pitch to those assembled in Minneapolis last weekend for the National Conference for Media Reform… June 14th marks the beginning of a 100 day countdown to One Web Day 2008. One Web Day is a celebration of the Web – conceived as an analogue of Earth Day – and held annually on September 22. The web has changed our lives and continues to do so as more and more get connected. It’s worth celebrating.

Susan’s mission is to make visible something we may tend to take for granted, about it so that we can be clear about it’s value and more likely to defend what makes it special. I’m proud to be an Ambassador of One Web Day, adiposity here in Chicago.

Chicagoans are familiar with One Web Day and are getting geared up for September 22. At this week’s recent Chicago NetTuesday gathering at the Illinois Information Technology Association we began discussion of things we might do. Video interviews, cross-blogging, community wireless deployments, who knows what else?

The Chicago NetTuesday crowd mixes technologists, non-profit people and others interested in the social good that can be promoted with the web. We’re eager to mashup technologies, organizations and people for the greater good.

One Web Day is an exercise in positive media… there’s much to celebrate on the web, even if there will always be necessity for caution and prudence.

One Web Day is what we make of it … we everywhere… we using any device or application… we creating and sharing content and responsibility.

We’re just at the beginning of deciding the thing’s we’ll be doing here in Chicago for OWD.

I’ll be presenting the idea to several groups over the coming months, inviting discussion and creative action, and at our NetTuesday meetings we hope to generate more content and ideas for OWD 2008.