Guys, I really don't know ...how you connect this to this thread if it has something to do with organizing our OLPC's information flow management....as to attract more collaboration, participation...etc...
http://laptop.org/team/index.php/OLPC_Eco-system Just soliciting ideas here.... I'm open to any process, system that's why I'm excited to see what's Sameer's group is doing. Cheers, ~mafe *"We can't do everything but we can do something"* On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Sameer Verma <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 7:16 AM, Bastien <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Just to make sure: maybe I misunderstood Sameer's email. My point was > > about fixing OLPC's information flow management, not Sugar's. > > > > The focus/scope of our project this semester has been the Contributor > Program at OLPC. Although many other constituencies plug into this > map, we simply didn't have time to do justice to all of them, > Sugarlabs included. I'll be the first to point it out that the > analysis is by no means complete, but it does provide a good degree of > clarity to the process. I hope we can do the same for other > constituencies in the next few months. After all, OLPC is still > Sugarlabs' largest customer, and Sugar seems to be the only viable > source for OLPC XOs in the field - they have to be connected. > > cheers, > Sameer > -- > Dr. Sameer Verma, Ph.D. > Associate Professor of Information Systems > San Francisco State University > San Francisco CA 94132 USA > http://verma.sfsu.edu/ > http://opensource.sfsu.edu/ > > > Frederick Grose <[email protected]> writes: > > > >> According to http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs#Principles, > participants > >> and contributors will. > >> > >> One problem might be where best to document. The pending reports should > help us > >> sort out that issue. > >> > >> === Principles === In order for Sugar to be successful, it needs the > >> participation of a large number of people who share common goals while > >> maintaining independence, so that each participant has the ability to > act > >> independently. For these reasons, Sugar Labs subscribes to the > principles > >> described [http://flors.wordpress.com/2008/05/04/ > >> the-paradigm-of-the-open-organization/ here], which are the author's own > >> translation of an [http://web.archive.org/web/20050317231119/http:// > >> interactors.coop/organizacionabierta original text in Spanish.] > ====Identity=== > >> = * Clear mission – Fully disclosed objectives. * Declared commitments – > >> Affinities and aversions explained. * Declared outside connections – > >> Relationships with other organizations explicitly listed. > ====Structure==== * > >> Horizontal organization – Teams and facilitators work on > responsibilities and > >> agreements. * Identified contributors – Who is who, people are > reachable. * > >> Clear responsibilities – Who is in charge of what. * Activities > described – All > >> of the ongoing work is acknowledged. See [[ > http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/ > >> Wiki_Team/Guide/Wiki_Structure | Wiki Structure]] for a guide to how the > wiki > >> models Sugar Labs' structure. ====Operation==== * Open participation – > Anybody > >> can access the information and get a first responsibility. * Meritocracy > – > >> Responsibilities are acquired (or lost) based on one's skills, results, > and > >> contributors’ support. * Voluntary (non-)engagement – Nobody is forced > to be > >> involved or to keep responsibilities. ====Information==== * Regular > reports – > >> Reported activities and future plans allow monitoring and participation. > * > >> Information accessible – Even internal operational information is > available by > >> default. * Explicit confidentiality – It is explained what matters are > >> confidential, why, and who can access them. ====Goods==== * Economic > model – > >> Feasibility and sustainability plans are exposed. (Please see/contribute > to the > >> discussion [[Sugar Labs/Funding|here]].) * Resources – Inventory of > items > >> detailing who contributed what and why. * Public accounts – It’s clear > where > >> the money comes from and where it goes. * A special [[Sugar Labs/Thank > You| > >> thanks]] to our contributors. > >> > >> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 6:12 AM, Bastien <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Sounds interesting. > >> > >> It's a useful first step. IMHO the second step is to attribute > clear > >> responsabilities to real human beings: who does what when it comes > to > >> sending/receiving information. > >> > >> I helped with maintaining the OLPC News page on the wiki for a > while. > >> It was not clear who was in charge of this; now that I declined > doing > >> it, it is still not clear who have to do it. > >> > >> Sameer Verma <[email protected]> writes: > >> > >> > Information flow is a critical problem for any organization. Some > >> > researchers even point out that an organization is shaped by how > >> > information flows within and outside of it. Free flow of > information > >> > builds networks. Restricted flow of information builds > hierarchies. In > >> > the OLPC context, information flow happens over several channels: > >> > mailing lists, IRC, Talk pages, Wiki pages, phone calls, RT, > >> > face-to-face, and IM (did I miss anything?). We all have > preferences > >> > for channels and applications. One can largely divide the channels > >> > into synchronous (IM, Phone, etc) and asynchronous (e-mail, wiki) > and > >> > the applications that support these channels. We also tend to have > >> > preferences for applications: wiki, forum, mailing list, IRC etc. > >> > Then, there's the element of public vs private conversations. As a > >> > researcher in Information Systems, I find these problems very > >> > interesting. > >> > > >> > Two problems arise: > >> > 1) too many channels (example: if I wasn't on the phone > conference, > >> > I'll miss out the details via IRC) lead to lack of critical mass > and > >> > fragmentation > >> > 2) The application (wiki or IRC or mailing list) is a hammer and > every > >> > problem looks like a nail that it can fix. "Throw it on the wiki" > is a > >> > source of a lot of misery! > >> > > >> > Then there is the element of fashionable social networking > (flickr, > >> > twitter, tumblr, etc)...as if e-mail, IM, IRC, and chatter at > cafes > >> > aren't social networking! That topic is for another day :-) My > >> > approach is that we figure out the problem first, and then find a > tool > >> > to fix it. Activity centric as opposed to application centric. > Sound > >> > familiar? > >> > > >> > So, this semester, I worked with five of my graduate students who > >> > undertook a Information Systems Analysis and Design project to > analyze > >> > the OLPC information flow problem and come up with some design > >> > concepts. All the students were new to the problem. This was > useful > >> > because their perspective was quite new and they asked some very > good > >> > questions. > >> > > >> > They used phone interviews, e-mails, in-person interviews, and > >> > observations on the mailing lists, phone conferences, and the RT > >> > system to gather data. A huge thank you to Adam Holt, Seth > Woodworth, > >> > SJ Klein and a bunch of other who contributed and facilitated. > >> > > >> > In brief, they have pulled together the following: > >> > > >> > A general problem mind map (Freemind) > >> > Context map (Dia) > >> > Data Flow Diagrams (Dia) > >> > Entity-Relationship Diagram (Dia) > >> > Prototype (Drupal) > >> > Report and presentation (OpenOffice) > >> > > >> > Their semester ends next week, and the report and presentation are > due > >> > on the 21st. However, given that SugarCamp is this weekend, we'll > try > >> > to post bits and pieces on the wiki in the hope that it will help > with > >> > some of the discussion (market...@sugarlabs cc'd). In the spirit > of > >> > keeping things open and generative, we have decided to release the > >> > documents, slides and diagrams under a CC license and also release > >> > source files to make modifications easier. We've also stuck with > FOSS > >> > titles and open formats for all documents - this was a bit of a > >> > struggle because some of the tools are not as mature as their > >> > proprietary counterparts (Dia vs Visio) and the students were a > lot > >> > more familiar with the proprietary ones (Visio vs Dia). > >> > > >> > There are some unfinished pieces, which will hopefully be worked > on in > >> > the next few months to add better definition to the overall flow > of > >> > information. Stay tuned to this thread for updates. > >> > > >> > cheers, > >> > Sameer > >> > >> -- > >> Bastien > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Marketing mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/marketing > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Grassroots mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/grassroots > > > > -- > > Bastien > > _______________________________________________ > > Marketing mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/marketing > > > _______________________________________________ > support-gang mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/support-gang >
_______________________________________________ Grassroots mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/grassroots
