[Freedombox-discuss] Relationship driven privacy

ya knygar knygar at gmail.com
Tue Jul 12 18:36:03 UTC 2011


> I only mean to say that I have some doubts
> about the efficacy of on-list conversation, because I do not see much
> participation from members of the TAC.

That's, i think, the consequences of using mail-lists (among other).
What i'm trying
to explain in "Discussion system for FreedomBox Foundation" topic,
now we have two mailing lists, one half-ERP and half-Wiki instead of
one open and user-friendly
ERP and one user-friendly discussion/proposition system around (or, as
a coupled part),
that leads to the obvious mess.

> I would be happy to be told that I'm wrong on this one, and that a
> quorum is indeed present. Just thought I would see if anyone else if
> having similar feelings. What is the organisational structure here?
> What does it mean? Who are we? Is this a worthwhile question?

FreedomBox isn't the typical W3C/IETF/GNU-distributive "working group"
As i understand - it has a much broader scope and auditory, much more
dependent on "out-side" view and participation.
By that - usual tools don't suit without re-tailoring or complete re-factoring.
I believe that conclusion of TAC separation is coming from these - two lists,
5 systems separation view (2 types of lists, wiki, release control system+ERP),
not from actual difference in intentions and positions.

> Perhaps we could adopt something of a 'harm reduction' approach here.
> It's like binge drinking in colleges. We know that people are going to
> do it anyway, so we should do whatever we can to make them safe in
> doing so. More than that, as Daniel said, there is value in it.
+1

> I'll only add that anonymity is part of the authentication spectrum,
> but it's not the only part that matters. Giving people distinct and
> understandable choices as regards their mode of access seems
> essential. That means providing mechanisms not just for anonymization,
> but for building avatars which are identified but not verified, and
> finally for presenting an identity that is verifiably linked to a person.

+1!

> I'll just put it
> this way: it sucks not knowing if big decisions are being made in a
> room somewhere.

That the situation you could see widely in organizations(many kinds)
that wasn't able to introduce a user-friendly and open to broad
view(in this case) ERP for the whole organizational needs.

> We've just got to divide the
problem up into little actionable parts,
that's what is hardly done in non-efficient community systems.
You could have a man that separate it all but if you could have a
people who, collaboratively one by one - separate and polish the view
and path of organization, the difference is amazing.

> This needs to be done early and often, with input from real,
> non-technical users as an integral part of the design process. I'm
> happy to test on my family!

I'm a UI-UX designer for life and - the proposed separation but
openness is what - often helps the designers to make their best and
still - didn't learn all the near-by professions, thankfully, i have a
big management experience, also, so - with my designer work i'm able
to figure out - how the entire system work to make the best graphical
design choices, however - it's the corner-stone of usual web-design
problems, in result - you often see (at least it was popular, in the
past) that programmers became to designers and otherwise that,
obviously(i can show many examples) lead to "these" systems - half
here and half there, that's the specific problem of Open-Source,
particularly, as many PM's think that they could easily manage it all
"on the go" and without ERP, however, other team members often need a
more declared separation (on pair with openness and clear
understanding of what is going around - maybe not the full detailed
specification as it's involving all the learning around, but - clear
view on the path and ways of the project). So - separation of
activities could bring the good result, only, if combined with tide
and dynamic encyclopaedia of project's knowledge and decisions, i
think.



More information about the Freedombox-discuss mailing list