Hi everyone, I was less connected for the last few days and I am quite astonished<https://twitter.com/samgoeta/status/456409840726704129>by the new identity. I share most concerns already expressed so I will be short, it's difficult to follow.
I would like to share a less-addressed concern about the new okfn.org. Could we just agree first on the identity and then launch a new website? Also the new okfn.org does not mean much if we don't know the whole OKF strategy which is I believe currently drafted. To me, the new okfn.org (besides already what was already expressed on identity): - does not explain *what Open Knowledge actually is*! Stating the summarized open definition on the homepage would be a good thing. - *emphasizes* too much on *services* offered by OKF Central - does not present any of our *projects* (what we do is part of what we are): CKAN, School of Data, Public Domain Review, Open Spending, Open Definition, Open Data Index, Textus… I could not find them on the new website! - is actually quite good in the last section to *explain the benefits* of open knowledge - misses *action calls* besides just signing up to the newsletter Can we discuss about the website issue at the next community call? Thanks Best Sam On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 9:49 PM, Aaron Wolf <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Rob Myers <[email protected]> wrote: > >> "sharing" is >> rapidly becoming a synonym for renting >> > > I don't know this to be true at all. Just because some people are abusing > the term doesn't mean that much. Most of your critique is just negative > discounting of my proposal. I don't really care whether *my* proposal is > used, but "change the world" is as vacuous and overused as anything out > there, and the effect of "Data" on changing the world could be as negative > as it is positive depending upon what the data is and who controls it. It > is imperative that it be clear *what direction* we are proposing that the > change go. > > "See How Data Can Change The World" is *too* focused, that's the point all > along. Less focused is the goal here. We want the focus to be about > empowering the world's citizens, not about Big Data controlling us, we want > the focus to be broader, not about venerating Data as the primary or only > focus of Openness. > > Big Data is a reality today whether we like it or not. The OKF needn't > exist just to promote data itself. The point has to be about promoting > specifically Open data over restricted data controlled by governments and > corporations. The point of "Open Knowledge" overall is for that same > Openness to be applied to many things. The Openness and empowerment of > people is the goal, whether we apply the values of openness to data or to > art or to educational resources etc. > > If the OKF is to be strictly a data-focused organization, it should become > the Open Data Foundation, and people who don't care about data as much can > just be tangential supporters. There is a big decision here about focus, > and it appears that when questioned nobody is suggesting that it really > become the Open Data Foundation, although that honestly could be a > reasonable direction for various reasons. But it either should embrace that > or work to be inclusive of other areas. Either you focus or you don't. > Don't pretend to be inclusive but actually neglect areas outside of a > certain focus. > > I see no problem with including the word "free" in things that refer to > Open. I'm not insisting on it either, but I completely reject the idea that > inclusion of other terms is inherently problematic. > > -- > Aaron Wolf > wolftune.com > > _______________________________________________ > okfn-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss > Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-discuss > >
_______________________________________________ okfn-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/okfn-discuss Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/okfn-discuss
