Dear all, I would suggest Open Knowledge Mordor; - since everyone knows that the Ring Wraiths and Orcs all act anarchically and will pillage for their own gain. But everyone also knows that there is a center from where all the evil flows, in this case, ehm, Cambridge ;)
Will leave it with all of you to make further direct LOTR character comparisons. -Christian -- Christian Villum International Community High Elf skype: christianvillum | @villum <http://www.twitter.com/villum> Open Knowledge <http://okfn.org/> * - See how a ring can change the world*http://okfn.org/ | @okfn <http://twitter.com/OKFN> Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/OKFNetwork> | Blog <http://blog.okfn.org/> Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 10:26:07 -0300 > From: Vitor Baptista <[email protected]> > > Hi all, > > I don't have strong opinions on either name, both are fine to me. I would > just like to point out that networks do have centers (for some definition > of centrality). The center on OKCentral doesn't necessarily mean "command > center", but it can be the center where all started from, or the center as > where we all meet, etc. > > I agree with Naomi that OKGlobal sound like we speak for all groups, but I > think OKCentral has the same problem (maybe even more). All in all, I > sightly prefer OKGlobal or OKInternational. > > Cheers, > > 2014-09-17 9:58 GMT-03:00 Naomi Lillie <[email protected]>: > > > Hi Tom & all, > > > > Interesting! Personally, I am in two minds about this. > > > > To me, calling the non-profit organisation 'Open Knowledge Global' > implies > > we would then speak for all the global groups, as a sort of collective or > > overall representative of all the individual Chapters, Local Groups, > > Working Groups and other community groups and individuals. As you know, > > this may not always be appropriate - different groups have different aims > > and methods, and - for example - if 'Open Knowledge Global' were to > write a > > thought-leadership blog on successful lobbying, that could damage the > > reputation of groups in areas where lobbying is perceived as anarchic or > > subversive. 'Central' seems more representative of a supportive > > administrative hub, which I would say is closer to my understanding of > the > > role the non-profit organisation currently undertakes, or seeks to > > undertake. > > > > On the other hand, I agree there isn't a 'centre' of Open Knowledge (if > > there is, I want the key!!). The non-profit organisation doesn't dictate > > what groups do or say, the lines of communication aren't radiating out > from > > a centre, the groups aren't gathered 'around the centre'; 'global' allows > > for a more amorphous cloud of multiple communication streams, and less > > hierarchy. Also being called 'OKCentral' has sometimes given the > impression > > that the most usual geographic location for OKCentral to meet - London, > > Berlin or Cambridge - is therefore its 'capital' or office. in the case > of > > London and Cambridge, this is exacerbated by the fact that there is no > > established Local Group, and many people assume 'OKCentral' is the same > as > > 'OK-UK' or 'OK-England'. 'Global' may go some way to address this > > misconception and/or help us move away from this habit. > > > > There are examples of other organisations and communities being called > > 'international' - for example Amnesty International and Greenpeace > > International - perhaps people involved in those groups could share > > information about what the 'international' there implies and means in > > practise, and we could see whether that model fits with what we all are > or > > hope to be? > > > > I would love to hear more from people on this list about what you think > > and/or have experienced, as well as Local Group and Working Group > leaders - > > here looping in on CC. > > > > Thanks Tom for the thought-provoking suggestion! > > > > Naomi (speaking for myself only) > > > > > > On 16 September 2014 16:02, Julio Feliciano <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> +1 > >> > >> On Sep 15, 2014, at 11:36 PM, Nurunnaby Hasive <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> +1 > >> > >> On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Pieter Colpaert < > >> [email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> +1 > >>> Op 15 sep. 2014 13:18 schreef "Rufus Pollock" <[email protected] > >: > >>> > >>> Very good suggestion Tom - we sort of fell into the "Central" by > >>>> accident (btw it was always intended to convey coordination and > support > >>>> rather than direction). > >>>> > >>>> If others were happy with the "Global" moniker rather than "Central" > >>>> I think this would make perfect sense as a change. > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> > >>>> Rufus > >>>> > >>>> On 13 September 2014 16:12, Everton Zanella Alvarenga < > [email protected]> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Dear all, > >>>>> > >>>>> I believe for we work as a network, we shouldn't have a center. Thus > >>>>> I'd like to suggest henceforth to call Open Knowledge Central of Open > >>>>> Knowledge Global (OKCentral -> OKGlobal). And we work hard to work > in this > >>>>> way. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thoughts? > >>>>> > >>>>> Tom > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Everton Zanella Alvarenga (also Tom) > >>>>> Open Knowledge Brasil - Rede pelo Conhecimento Livre > >>>>> http://br.okfn.org > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> 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
