I hate this. I don't want to be one of the right people. My goal in life is
just to be one of the people, while insisting on well lit, large printed
menus, rule books, and street signs in more than one language.
[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Sam Boyer
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [NYCGA Internet] WTF Digital Strategy and IWG tonight....
i can sympathize, charles. fact is that the intense desire many of us have
to contribute in some way or another and the speed at which this is all
taking place amounts to a fair degree of systemic, necessary
disorganization. folks are gonna keep doin stuff based on their interest,
and as long as we can keep it all at least loosely coordinated, the overall
benefit in terms of bringing people in and accomplishing the needs we see in
front of us is probably a net positive. so for the moment, at least,
building interpersonal networks is really the best way to get things done.
fwiw, the way i approach it (as someone who also likes precisely the right
process for a need) is to look at it as an evolving system. as the dust
settles and needs become clearer, more precise, democratic, and transparent
solutions will become possible. for the moment, we're a bit (though not
entirely) stuck with just hoping that well-meaning individuals adhere to
even if there the situation you describe occurs, where a strategy WG knocks
comes up with an idea only to find it already implemented, you've at least
started the process of making a place people can go who want to have that
kind of discussion. maybe the only adjustment you need to make in your
expectations for the strategy group is that you do a lot of talking to a lot
of the 'right people' and try to make the group into a hub for discussions
that would otherwise happen elsewhere. and hey, at that point, you become
one of the 'right people,' and can start ensuring more transparent,
democratic process :)
On 10/18/11 1:16 PM, Charles Lenchner wrote:
On Sunday evening I spent four hours with many wonderful folks. What I
thought we accomplished was the creation of four taskforces, and the
start of work on each of them. Most of the work of IWG is connected to
the development and management of the new website, but my heart was
invested in finding or creating a forum for 'digital strategy' that
addresses non website issues.
On Sunday night, I thought we had succeeded. Today, after talking to
Devon about my interests and attending a meeting of the FLO/Solutions
Working Group, I understand more AND I'm also more confused. I'm
hearing, more or less, that a meeting of a group to come up with
goals/solutions/plans addressing digital strategy are moot because
'someone just needs to go to the Outreach WG and figure out with them
what they need from FLO/Solutions and then go to lots of other groups
and work it out.'
And indeed, someone is doing that, and it doesn't include a stop at
the IWG or the Digital Strategy meeting later this evening.
So I'm torn between following this someone around (trying to come up
with solutions for 'what mass lists should exist for email? What
should they say? Who should decide? How does it get managed and
integrated with social media and the needs of all WGs?') and returning
to the IWG meeting. I mean. imagine that the Digital Strategy group
comes up with some great ideas in four days, only to discover that two
empowered individuals have it 'all taken care of' by making the rounds
of 'the folks that matter'?
For me, this raises all kinds of questions about transparency,
accountability, democracy and efficiency. But then, I'm a bureaucrat
at heart who likes to know precisely what the right process is for any
activity. #OWS is kind of challenging..
So it's 4:15 and I don't know how best to plug in my expertise - after
a few weeks of meetings and personal conversations. Everyone I speak
with affirms that it's like this 'for everybody.' Not sure where I'll
be at 5pm and 7pm.