How do you keep tabs on Chicago? Sites, sources, strategies and tools welcome! Share here or at the Chicago Region Civic Forum or blog it!
Archive for the ‘tools’ Category
How do you keep tabs on Chicago?
Sunday, January 31st, 2010sustainability and the thriving commons, or “Divided We Fall short”
Sunday, February 8th, 2009Friends,
Together we can enumerate and provide links to an array of efforts that are disjointed, though worthy. They may have different levels of activity or may be at a relatively inactive state after prior peaks. Enumerating and evaluating these would be a useful task for us, too.
We’ve got an abundance of toolsets and tool providers as well … and so the special challenge to a sustainable effort and a thriving commons becomes more and more probable (it’s not just probable, it’s the situation we have tended towards, and the situation we’re in).
Consider each of these tools and possible community spaces as an attractor. People like us, are seeking community around the practice of community ICT, and if they don’t find it they rightly constitute it for themselves.
A somewhat active space functions as an attractor in these circumstances and from a certain perspective it makes a lot of sense to go with the tool that is present and functioning at some level versus duplicating efforts and dividing the field further.
The issue, as I see it is that the field has multiple attractors none of which are established quite with the field in mind. Someone who finally finds one of these attractors may be quite relieved and may embed themselves in the community (which may or may not satisfy them, or may have fallen into a trough of activity – and there is something valiant in seeking to fulfill the promise of our potential as a wider community in any of these contexts).
But we here, knowing of the many and disparate efforts are a bit weary at maintaining a presence in any number of such sites and communities. Here, even with this conversation we’re making choices where to post, and we have doubts about which is the most effective channel.
We also recognize that as new tools emerge, new community attractors will be constructed by those who either haven’t found the other attractors, or for whom the degree of community there was lacking.
As we make choices based on our history and preferences we’re going to keep fragmenting this field, and reacting to the fragmentation.
Since there are existing sites of community or potential community, which should serve as assets to our movement, we ought to reflect on the perspective of “Movement as Network” (a paper by Gideon Rosenblatt of ONE/NW) – a thought piece for the environmental movement that I read with our field of Community ICT in mind.
What do we do with these assets, these many sites of aggregation, these attractors? Should we establish higher expectations? Should we push them towards collaboration and coordination? Should we disrupt models that don’t align with our own vision of Community ICT? I’ve got my own answer to these, you may all guess.
I’m inviting you to a new mode of practice where we consciously reshape this network of communities and resources. We can take initial steps to get data and information flowing and where it should
not matter which of these sites you come to, you can get the full swath of information you need.
Think for a moment of the WISEREarth Index – could their organizational directory serve as an equivalent of an OpenSocial for the NGO/NPO sector? (Thinking more broadly here than Community ICT – any non-profit monitoring the online world and maintaining any sort of presence there – soon sees a multiple presence effect and has some very partial representation of themselves in many many places, some of their own initiative, and some a result of scraping and some as a result of friends propagating their presence. None of this is sustainable under the current regime of information flow.)
All of this sounds a bit extreme and ambitious … plenty of big ideas litter our sector and have diverted us from more humble work (and some have inspired us to achieve great things, no doubt).
Yet, we can start humbly in this, and we have. Enumerating these spaces, evaluating them and engaging them… starting this conversation is perhaps our own way of moving towards the movement as network attitude. It is for me.
MM
Emily’s Diigo Demo: making the web work for you
Sunday, April 13th, 2008This is one of Emily Barney’s many excellent tutorials. Diigo is an interesting tool, worth checking out!
Flawed Practices 2.0
Sunday, February 3rd, 2008Tell me, does it make any sense to put words in the mouths of your users, without an opportunity to review those words or amend them? This – and other similarly ill-conceived practices – undermines the credibility of social networking sites and applications.
Take naymz.com … a site I’ve recently been looking at. (I tend to compare these sites on policy, features, interface, etc.)
It’s a reputation site. It’s got a mechanism for inviting your contacts on various services, it sends the message.
Some of your contacts take the requested action and agree to be a reference, or go further and offer a comment as endorsement. You manage these responses – selecting which references to show … all sounds fine. However, upon taking such step the site sends a message on your behalf thanking your contact for what they have done.
Why do I have a problem with this?
In general, putting words in my mouth that I wouldn’t say or that I don’t know will be said for me (or transmitted) is wrong-headed! As I said, I am on a lot of sites. I’ve been guilty of inviting others, and I have likewise felt some obligation to respond to site add-request when others have joined a new site. But additional communications beyond the first approved (with opportunity for edit) invitational message implies deeper commitment to and endorsement of the site or application. I’d like to make that judgment call myself.