Subject: Re: [NYCGA Internet] Why I'm coming to the IWG meeting tonight
From: Josh Nielsen
Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2011 12:37:07 -0700
To: internet_working_group@googlegroups.com

Yes, it would be really helpful for us that are working remotely if everyone got into #hackupy at irc.freenode.net  Otherwise we are kinda in the dark.

On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 12:35 PM, Sam Boyer <act@samboyer.org> wrote:
fantastic list of highly pertinent questions, charles.

i'm an nyc resident, but i'm in portland this weekend and san francisco
the next - is there any way to participate virtually in the meeting?

On 10/16/11 12:16 PM, Charles Lenchner wrote:
> Hey all,
>
>
>
> I’ve met some of you and look forward to meeting some more. It felt
> right to show up after giving the meeting organizers and WG veterans a
> chance to process why I’m attending and how I might help.
>
>
>
> Please do forgive the telegraphic style, but folks are busy.
>
>
>
> 1.       Soon, #OWS is going to have a functional website that is
> ‘official’ and a working database that can build lists, manage email
> groups and send thousands of emails to existing lists. We know that
> there are thousands of email addresses (from Kickstarter,
> OccupytheBoardroom and WG lists) to start with.
>
> 2.       What we do not have is a designated WG or committee that makes
> decisions around this. Decisions like:
>
> a.       Who gets to message the entire list? How often? With what content?
>
> b.      What is the goal of our online messaging? Political statements?
> List growth? Fundraising? Event turnout? Who decides between competing
> priorities?
>
> c.       Which social media platforms will be connected on the back end,
> which ones will not? What is the goal of our official social media
> properties? (Education? Solicitation of support? Decision making and
> deliberation?)
>
> d.      What major segments of data do we anticipate having in the
> database? Do we assume that a web commenter wants to get emails? Or that
> an email list member wants commenting access?
>
> e.      Should messages be short and sweet, to drive action, or
> newsletter style, to get ‘everyone’s’ announcement in front of people?
>
> f.        Under what conditions is it okay to message about an
> unofficial, but supportive effort – like the OccupytheBoardroom effort?
> What if there are multiple, excellent initiatives all demanding the same
> level of attention?
>
> 3.       Is GA approval necessary for online initiatives, or is GA
> approval assumed if a working group does something on their own initiative?
>
> 4.       Should messages be signed as a corporate entity (we, #OWS NYS)
> or individually (Jane Doe, non-leader designated email signer for the
> third week of October)?
>
> 5.       Under what circumstances is it ‘fine’ to work with an under a
> corporate partner (cf, OccupyTogether + Meetup.com or OccupytheBoardRoom
> + Tumblr) and when should this merit resistance? Is this the kind of
> decision to be made inside a specific committee, or by the GA? If the
> initiative is ‘owned’ by allies and merely endorsed, does that make a
> difference? Should we refuse to work with Paypal?
>
>
>
> Broadly speaking, these questions fall under ‘digital strategy.’ This is
> a function often carried out by communication directors, online
> organizers, or consulting firms – though none of these things apply to
> the #OWS situation. The question is…. Where do they fall? Would anyone
> care/object if someone started a ‘digital strategy working group?’ Why
> or why not? (Note that such a committee would do NO programming, coding
> or web development….)
>
>
>
> The underlying set of values at play here is accessibility. An area of
> concern with #OWS is the construction of a coherent, transparent ladder
> of engagement that makes it possible for ‘newbies’ to become ‘insiders’
> according to a set path. What do we offer people who want to be
> informed? Who desire participation, but only for five minutes a day, or
> one hour once a week? What mechanisms exist to solicit particular forms
> of participation and support, reach segmented audiences, or take into
> account particular perspectives? All of these questions together
> represent ‘organizing.’ I think we should do it, but it remains unclear
> where it should happen.
>
>
>
> Tonight, I’d like to find out.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Charles Lenchner
>




--
Thanks,
Josh Nielsen
< PREV INDEX SEARCH NEXT >