Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-14 Thread mray


On 13.01.2017 23:11, Michael Siepmann wrote:
> On 01/13/2017 03:02 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> One extra thought about this process:
>>
>> Although I'll aim to make audio that could stay as final, if the work on
>> the visuals somehow calls for minor tweaks in the script, it's not
>> absolutely set in stone. It's final now, and I hope to not change it,
>> but it's not literally impossible, of course.
> 
> On a related note, the easier it is in future to make adjustments to the
> script and video in light of feedback from a larger audience, the
> better. But of course also, the better it is at the outset, the better.
> All I'm saying is that if there are options for how to make the video
> where one option is slightly better right now, but will make it MUCH
> more work to make changes in future, then it may be worth opting for a
> slightly less optimal option that leaves us more able to make
> incremental improvements in future.
> 
> 
> 

I think you mentioned this earlier.
Thanks for bringing it up again now.
I'll keep in mind that looking at the video from that angle may offer
new ways to proceed with it down the road.

Constantly updating a video has many downsides, but I can see - for
example - how having an AB test might be very valuable.

...if only we had the ressources to gather this kind of data.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-14 Thread mray


On 13.01.2017 22:48, J.wuensch wrote:
> Guys, no need to start fighting here. The introduction video is a very 
> important part of the snowdrift launch. We all know that, and I think we all 
> agree, that Aron as a co-founder of the snowdrift project should have some 
> influence on it.
> @ Aron. No need to worry. We will take your suggestions into account. The 
> storyboarding notes that you have written to each section are a very good 
> starting point. I think what mray is pointing out here is that we as artist 
> just want to have a bit of creative freedom in the process of creating the 
> video instead of getting constantly interrupted by endless discussions on the 
> mailing list. Then, when we have something to show, we can discuss and review 
> it together. We are used to critical reviews, so it's not the end of the 
> world for us, if we have to change something. As far as I'm concerned I 
> hadn't had the time till now to think about the visuals complementing the 
> text. But this weekend and the next week I should find some time. If I have a 
> complex idea that's a lot of work, I would of course first ask you, if it's 
> suitable, so that we don't waste too much time on things that are not 
> supposed to be in the video. But for small things I would prefer to just do 
> them quickly and you can review and judge them later.
> And of course I'd be more happy to work with the audio instead the plain 
> text... ;)
> 
> Cheers, Johannes
> 
> 

Thanks for stepping up and clarifying your view.
(Especially if it is in my favor!!! ;) )

A heated debate isn't indicating fighting here though.
Aaron is a great discussion partner. Even if we tend to spend too much
time on discussing some subjects I greatly appreciate the constructive
outcomes.

That said, email is really a bad medium sometimes.








signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-13 Thread Michael Siepmann
On 01/13/2017 03:02 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> One extra thought about this process:
>
> Although I'll aim to make audio that could stay as final, if the work on
> the visuals somehow calls for minor tweaks in the script, it's not
> absolutely set in stone. It's final now, and I hope to not change it,
> but it's not literally impossible, of course.

On a related note, the easier it is in future to make adjustments to the
script and video in light of feedback from a larger audience, the
better. But of course also, the better it is at the outset, the better.
All I'm saying is that if there are options for how to make the video
where one option is slightly better right now, but will make it MUCH
more work to make changes in future, then it may be worth opting for a
slightly less optimal option that leaves us more able to make
incremental improvements in future.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-13 Thread Aaron Wolf
One extra thought about this process:

Although I'll aim to make audio that could stay as final, if the work on
the visuals somehow calls for minor tweaks in the script, it's not
absolutely set in stone. It's final now, and I hope to not change it,
but it's not literally impossible, of course.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-13 Thread Aaron Wolf
On 01/13/2017 01:48 PM, J.wuensch wrote:
> Guys, no need to start fighting here. The introduction video is a very
> important part of the snowdrift launch. We all know that, and I think we
> all agree, that Aron as a co-founder of the snowdrift project should
> have some influence on it.
> @ Aron. No need to worry. We will take your suggestions into account.
> The storyboarding notes that you have written to each section are a very
> good starting point. I think what mray is pointing out here is that we
> as artist just want to have a bit of creative freedom in the process of
> creating the video instead of getting constantly interrupted by endless
> discussions on the mailing list. Then, when we have something to show,
> we can discuss and review it together. We are used to critical reviews,
> so it's not the end of the world for us, if we have to change something.
> As far as I'm concerned I hadn't had the time till now to think about
> the visuals complementing the text. But this weekend and the next week I
> should find some time. If I have a complex idea that's a lot of work, I
> would of course first ask you, if it's suitable, so that we don't waste
> too much time on things that are not supposed to be in the video. But
> for small things I would prefer to just do them quickly and you can
> review and judge them later.
> And of course I'd be more happy to work with the audio instead the plain
> text... ;)
> 
> Cheers, Johannes
> 

Thanks for the thoughts Johannes! For reference, we just discussed this
on #snowdrift on freenode IRC a bit and came to the understanding that
this relates to the fact that I still haven't done my task of writing
out a clear communications policy, which I'll get to soon.

Please don't consider my suggestions just because they came from me.
Consider them only as far as they are useful as long as otherwise
following the general communications policy which I'll publish soon.

It's really important for this sort of community project that I am NOT a
benevolent dictator or otherwise deferred to just because I'm
co-founder. We're still getting comfortable with the Holacracy stuff
we're using to separate out accountabilities and roles.

Anyway, I'm going to prioritize the audio before I then get to the
communications policy.

After actually working on the video, if you *want* my input, you can
always ask. But Robert is the designer in charge of that process and
will work with you and others in the manner he prefers once he has what
he needs from me.

Cheers,
Aaron


> 
> Sent from ProtonMail <https://protonmail.ch>, encrypted email based in
> Switzerland.
> 
> 
>>  Original Message 
>> Subject: Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft
>> Local Time: January 13, 2017 9:17 PM
>> UTC Time: January 13, 2017 8:17 PM
>> From: m...@mray.de
>> To: design@lists.snowdrift.coop
>>
>>
>>
>> On 13.01.2017 18:31, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> > On 01/13/2017 01:53 AM, mray wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 11.01.2017 21:22, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> >>> On 01/11/2017 11:57 AM, mray wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 11.01.2017 17:21, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> I already started a new thread to discuss the story-boarding. Do we
>> >>>>> really need the audio files before starting that storyboarding
>> process?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Yes.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Please forgive my ignorance here. Can you explain why you need audio
>> >>> files instead of just the written text in order to do
>> storyboarding? It
>> >>> just makes no sense to me at all. I don't imagine that storyboards
>> >>> already need millisecond-to-millisecond timing notes or anything.
>> Don't
>> >>> we just start by drafting some images and ideas for what goes with the
>> >>> script?
>> >>>
>> >>> I can understand that having audio is nice, but a hard requirement
>> >>> before we start working on and discussing storyboarding. I really
>> don't
>> >>> get it.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Imagine making a music-video with only having music sheets beforehand.
>> >> You *could* do it - but waiting for the recording is better.
>> >> I don't want to put pressure on you, but I guess recording a few takes
>> >> should be possible soon. Unless we have to wait very long I think
>> >> waiting is worth it.
>> >>
>> >> Concerning the next steps 

Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-13 Thread J.wuensch
Guys, no need to start fighting here. The introduction video is a very 
important part of the snowdrift launch. We all know that, and I think we all 
agree, that Aron as a co-founder of the snowdrift project should have some 
influence on it.
@ Aron. No need to worry. We will take your suggestions into account. The 
storyboarding notes that you have written to each section are a very good 
starting point. I think what mray is pointing out here is that we as artist 
just want to have a bit of creative freedom in the process of creating the 
video instead of getting constantly interrupted by endless discussions on the 
mailing list. Then, when we have something to show, we can discuss and review 
it together. We are used to critical reviews, so it's not the end of the world 
for us, if we have to change something. As far as I'm concerned I hadn't had 
the time till now to think about the visuals complementing the text. But this 
weekend and the next week I should find some time. If I have a complex idea 
that's a lot of work, I would of course first ask you, if it's suitable, so 
that we don't waste too much time on things that are not supposed to be in the 
video. But for small things I would prefer to just do them quickly and you can 
review and judge them later.
And of course I'd be more happy to work with the audio instead the plain 
text... ;)

Cheers, Johannes



Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.ch), encrypted email based in 
Switzerland.



 Original Message 
Subject: Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft
Local Time: January 13, 2017 9:17 PM
UTC Time: January 13, 2017 8:17 PM
From: m...@mray.de
To: design@lists.snowdrift.coop



On 13.01.2017 18:31, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> On 01/13/2017 01:53 AM, mray wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11.01.2017 21:22, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>>> On 01/11/2017 11:57 AM, mray wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11.01.2017 17:21, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I already started a new thread to discuss the story-boarding. Do we
>>>>> really need the audio files before starting that storyboarding process?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Please forgive my ignorance here. Can you explain why you need audio
>>> files instead of just the written text in order to do storyboarding? It
>>> just makes no sense to me at all. I don't imagine that storyboards
>>> already need millisecond-to-millisecond timing notes or anything. Don't
>>> we just start by drafting some images and ideas for what goes with the
>>> script?
>>>
>>> I can understand that having audio is nice, but a hard requirement
>>> before we start working on and discussing storyboarding. I really don't
>>> get it.
>>>
>>
>> Imagine making a music-video with only having music sheets beforehand.
>> You *could* do it - but waiting for the recording is better.
>> I don't want to put pressure on you, but I guess recording a few takes
>> should be possible soon. Unless we have to wait very long I think
>> waiting is worth it.
>>
>> Concerning the next steps I don't plan to have a workflow that is
>> remotely similar to the one of the script. I expect to work on this
>> inside the design circle and seek acceptance/feedback when there are
>> results to talk about.
>>
>
>
> If I know the gist of some music, I could totally story-board, like make
> plans for a music video just looking at lyrics. It would be no good to
> actually make even the first draft of the actual video, but talking
> about what types of scenes we'd have wouldn't require the recording of
> the music. Generally sketching out a list of scenes in an order would
> not be blocked.
>

So we agree. You probably just did not consider that what you proposed
can be recognized as a kind of a "first draft" of an actual video.

I plan to make the directions the video can evolve into dependent on
skills, preferences and time of people working on it. Ideally based on
face to face conversations. Reading about more concrete ideas in an
email from somebody outside the "design role"(?) seems to be a domain
conflict.

> But, yes, I'll get audio really soon.
>
> And sure, it makes sense to work internally on things. But I have some
> communication directives that I want included. The images that go with
> the line about restrictions must include reference to *both* locks and
> ads. The last line about clearing the path should hint at (i.e.
> foreshadow) the snowdrift metaphor. And I want to emphasize the need for
> reinforcing the general sense of cooperation and community.
>
> In order to avoid domain conflicts, the best strategy is to run the
> general i

Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-13 Thread mray


On 13.01.2017 18:31, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> On 01/13/2017 01:53 AM, mray wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11.01.2017 21:22, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>>> On 01/11/2017 11:57 AM, mray wrote:


 On 11.01.2017 17:21, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>
> I already started a new thread to discuss the story-boarding. Do we
> really need the audio files before starting that storyboarding process?
>

 Yes.

>>>
>>> Please forgive my ignorance here. Can you explain why you need audio
>>> files instead of just the written text in order to do storyboarding? It
>>> just makes no sense to me at all. I don't imagine that storyboards
>>> already need millisecond-to-millisecond timing notes or anything. Don't
>>> we just start by drafting some images and ideas for what goes with the
>>> script?
>>>
>>> I can understand that having audio is nice, but a hard requirement
>>> before we start working on and discussing storyboarding. I really don't
>>> get it.
>>>
>>
>> Imagine making a music-video with only having music sheets beforehand.
>> You *could* do it - but waiting for the recording is better.
>> I don't want to put pressure on you, but I guess recording a few takes
>> should be possible soon. Unless we have to wait very long I think
>> waiting is worth it.
>>
>> Concerning the next steps I don't plan to have a workflow that is
>> remotely similar to the one of the script. I expect to work on this
>> inside the design circle and seek acceptance/feedback when there are
>> results to talk about.
>>
> 
> 
> If I know the gist of some music, I could totally story-board, like make
> plans for a music video just looking at lyrics. It would be no good to
> actually make even the first draft of the actual video, but talking
> about what types of scenes we'd have wouldn't require the recording of
> the music. Generally sketching out a list of scenes in an order would
> not be blocked.
> 

So we agree. You probably just did not consider that what you proposed
can be recognized as a kind of a "first draft" of an actual video.

I plan to make the directions the video can evolve into dependent on
skills, preferences and time of people working on it. Ideally based on
face to face conversations. Reading about more concrete ideas in an
email from somebody outside the "design role"(?) seems to be a domain
conflict.

> But, yes, I'll get audio really soon.
> 
> And sure, it makes sense to work internally on things. But I have some
> communication directives that I want included. The images that go with
> the line about restrictions must include reference to *both* locks and
> ads. The last line about clearing the path should hint at (i.e.
> foreshadow) the snowdrift metaphor. And I want to emphasize the need for
> reinforcing the general sense of cooperation and community.
> 
> In order to avoid domain conflicts, the best strategy is to run the
> general ideas for what is being communicated by me, and then as long as
> we're clear about the general messaging, it's your domain to determine
> how to make the video express it best.
> 

I appreciate you giving ideas but reject general directives about
concrete imagery. It is up to the video team to create images that
accompany the text you have the – literal – final word in.

Before we start you are free to give ideas.
After there is something to talk about (not the final video) you can
voice your judgement.
In the meantime I expect you to let "video people" do their thing
independently of what you would like to see included.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-13 Thread Stephen Michel

Snipping wildly to respond to one specific thing.

On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:53 AM, mray  wrote:

I expect to work on this inside the design circle and seek
acceptance/feedback when there are results to talk about.


For the record, there is no design *circle*, since circles are 
organized around a shared purpose, not a shared skill set. There's a 
website circle and an outreach circle. Each contains  a couple design 
roles.
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-13 Thread Aaron Wolf
On 01/13/2017 01:53 AM, mray wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11.01.2017 21:22, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> On 01/11/2017 11:57 AM, mray wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11.01.2017 17:21, Aaron Wolf wrote:

 I already started a new thread to discuss the story-boarding. Do we
 really need the audio files before starting that storyboarding process?

>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>
>> Please forgive my ignorance here. Can you explain why you need audio
>> files instead of just the written text in order to do storyboarding? It
>> just makes no sense to me at all. I don't imagine that storyboards
>> already need millisecond-to-millisecond timing notes or anything. Don't
>> we just start by drafting some images and ideas for what goes with the
>> script?
>>
>> I can understand that having audio is nice, but a hard requirement
>> before we start working on and discussing storyboarding. I really don't
>> get it.
>>
> 
> Imagine making a music-video with only having music sheets beforehand.
> You *could* do it - but waiting for the recording is better.
> I don't want to put pressure on you, but I guess recording a few takes
> should be possible soon. Unless we have to wait very long I think
> waiting is worth it.
> 
> Concerning the next steps I don't plan to have a workflow that is
> remotely similar to the one of the script. I expect to work on this
> inside the design circle and seek acceptance/feedback when there are
> results to talk about.
> 


If I know the gist of some music, I could totally story-board, like make
plans for a music video just looking at lyrics. It would be no good to
actually make even the first draft of the actual video, but talking
about what types of scenes we'd have wouldn't require the recording of
the music. Generally sketching out a list of scenes in an order would
not be blocked.

But, yes, I'll get audio really soon.

And sure, it makes sense to work internally on things. But I have some
communication directives that I want included. The images that go with
the line about restrictions must include reference to *both* locks and
ads. The last line about clearing the path should hint at (i.e.
foreshadow) the snowdrift metaphor. And I want to emphasize the need for
reinforcing the general sense of cooperation and community.

In order to avoid domain conflicts, the best strategy is to run the
general ideas for what is being communicated by me, and then as long as
we're clear about the general messaging, it's your domain to determine
how to make the video express it best.







signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-13 Thread mray


On 11.01.2017 21:22, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> On 01/11/2017 11:57 AM, mray wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11.01.2017 17:21, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>>>
>>> I already started a new thread to discuss the story-boarding. Do we
>>> really need the audio files before starting that storyboarding process?
>>>
>>
>> Yes.
>>
> 
> Please forgive my ignorance here. Can you explain why you need audio
> files instead of just the written text in order to do storyboarding? It
> just makes no sense to me at all. I don't imagine that storyboards
> already need millisecond-to-millisecond timing notes or anything. Don't
> we just start by drafting some images and ideas for what goes with the
> script?
> 
> I can understand that having audio is nice, but a hard requirement
> before we start working on and discussing storyboarding. I really don't
> get it.
> 

Imagine making a music-video with only having music sheets beforehand.
You *could* do it - but waiting for the recording is better.
I don't want to put pressure on you, but I guess recording a few takes
should be possible soon. Unless we have to wait very long I think
waiting is worth it.

Concerning the next steps I don't plan to have a workflow that is
remotely similar to the one of the script. I expect to work on this
inside the design circle and seek acceptance/feedback when there are
results to talk about.






signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-12 Thread Aaron Wolf
On 01/12/2017 02:12 AM, J.wuensch wrote:
> @Aron
> I would prefer to work with the audio because I think I would rather go
> for an animatic than a classic storyboard. An animatic is a video where
> there are no final shots, but just rough animation together with the sound.
> 
> Btw, you said you already have started a new thread to discuss the
> story-boarding. Where can I find that thread? I think I didn't receive
> something through the mailing lists. And as far as I know snowdrift
> hasn't moved to Discourse yet. Is it on Taiga? Or is there something
> else I don't know of?
> 

I sent it to this very list we are chatting on. It's an email with the
subject "intro video storyboarding"

And in regards to audio etc. I want to proceed with discussing the basic
*ideas* about what will be in the story board in the mean time until I
get a chance to do a more final audio. We can discuss the basic concepts
and goals before starting to make actual storyboards.

Discourse is indeed not quite ready yet, getting close.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-12 Thread J.wuensch
@Aron
I would prefer to work with the audio because I think I would rather go for an 
animatic than a classic storyboard. An animatic is a video where there are no 
final shots, but just rough animation together with the sound.

Btw, you said you already have started a new thread to discuss the 
story-boarding. Where can I find that thread? I think I didn't receive 
something through the mailing lists. And as far as I know snowdrift hasn't 
moved to Discourse yet. Is it on Taiga? Or is there something else I don't know 
of?

@Robert
UTC+1 is correct. I'm located in Stuttgart.
Sure I can give you some impressions of my earlier work. But as I already 
mentioned it's a bit different from what we need in the snowdrift video ;)

Here is my demoreel! I quickly uploaded it on a private account with a link to 
share it with you. Lol, I started it at the beginning of 2013. But as I never 
really needed it, it's still not finished... But almost... :D
https://goo.gl/photos/8y1k7Xa1ifidiAPt8
The bubbles at the beginning are completely 3d made in Blender by me. In all 
the other shots I mainly worked on the compositing, not the 3d stuff itself.

And this for example is a short where me and my brother were in the position of 
VFX supervising and lead compositing:
https://vimeo.com/35796070 and the breakdown: https://vimeo.com/36291888

Johannes





 Original Message 
Subject: Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft
Local Time: January 11, 2017 9:22 PM
UTC Time: January 11, 2017 8:22 PM
From: aa...@snowdrift.coop
To: design@lists.snowdrift.coop

On 01/11/2017 11:57 AM, mray wrote:
>
>
> On 11.01.2017 17:21, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>>
>> I already started a new thread to discuss the story-boarding. Do we
>> really need the audio files before starting that storyboarding process?
>>
>
> Yes.
>

Please forgive my ignorance here. Can you explain why you need audio
files instead of just the written text in order to do storyboarding? It
just makes no sense to me at all. I don't imagine that storyboards
already need millisecond-to-millisecond timing notes or anything. Don't
we just start by drafting some images and ideas for what goes with the
script?

I can understand that having audio is nice, but a hard requirement
before we start working on and discussing storyboarding. I really don't
get it.


___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-11 Thread Aaron Wolf
On 01/11/2017 11:57 AM, mray wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11.01.2017 17:21, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>>
>> I already started a new thread to discuss the story-boarding. Do we
>> really need the audio files before starting that storyboarding process?
>>
> 
> Yes.
> 

Please forgive my ignorance here. Can you explain why you need audio
files instead of just the written text in order to do storyboarding? It
just makes no sense to me at all. I don't imagine that storyboards
already need millisecond-to-millisecond timing notes or anything. Don't
we just start by drafting some images and ideas for what goes with the
script?

I can understand that having audio is nice, but a hard requirement
before we start working on and discussing storyboarding. I really don't
get it.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-11 Thread mray


On 11.01.2017 17:21, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> 
> I already started a new thread to discuss the story-boarding. Do we
> really need the audio files before starting that storyboarding process?
> 

Yes.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-11 Thread Aaron Wolf
On 01/11/2017 03:34 AM, mray wrote:
> 
> On 11.01.2017 11:51, J.wuensch wrote:
>> Hello Mray,
>>
>> I'm also looking forward to work with you on the video soon. My twin 
>> brother, who worked on some VFX projects, too, would like to join the video 
>> team, if possible.
>> Would we then be three people? Or are there others interested in working on 
>> it, too?
>> Anyway, just let me know, when you have the audio files. Then we can meet on 
>> jitsi or irc and discuss the details and begin with storyboarding/animatic 
>> etc...
>>
>> Johannes
>>
>>
> 
> Awesome, I'll get in touch as soon as we have the files. Of course your
> brother can join! We are happy to welcome any helping hand. It looks
> like we would be the only ones with experience in producing video.
> Speaking of it – is there an easy way to get an impression of earlier work?
> 
> If I'm not mistaken you are in my timezone (UTC+1), this should simplify
> the meeting process somewhat :)
> 
> 
> -Robert

I already started a new thread to discuss the story-boarding. Do we
really need the audio files before starting that storyboarding process?




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-11 Thread mray

On 11.01.2017 11:51, J.wuensch wrote:
> Hello Mray,
> 
> I'm also looking forward to work with you on the video soon. My twin brother, 
> who worked on some VFX projects, too, would like to join the video team, if 
> possible.
> Would we then be three people? Or are there others interested in working on 
> it, too?
> Anyway, just let me know, when you have the audio files. Then we can meet on 
> jitsi or irc and discuss the details and begin with storyboarding/animatic 
> etc...
> 
> Johannes
> 
> 

Awesome, I'll get in touch as soon as we have the files. Of course your
brother can join! We are happy to welcome any helping hand. It looks
like we would be the only ones with experience in producing video.
Speaking of it – is there an easy way to get an impression of earlier work?

If I'm not mistaken you are in my timezone (UTC+1), this should simplify
the meeting process somewhat :)


-Robert
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-10 Thread mray


On 09.01.2017 18:41, J.wuensch wrote:
> Hey guys,
> All in all it's pretty good! But there is one thing I noticed when I read the 
> text to other people. It's the "site-wide" budget in part 7 that seems to be 
> a bit confusing.
> 
> 7. And your pledges stay active as long as they fit within your site-wide 
> budget.
> 
> I would replace "your site-wide budget" with "your defined monthly budget":
> 
> 7. And your pledges stay active as long as they fit within your defined 
> monthly budget.
> 
> Why: Firstly, I think no one will get, what you mean by a "site-wide budget". 
> It's just to abstract. I read it to two people and they didn't get that 
> part... How the mechanism of the budget is working should be easily clarified 
> on the website later. I think for the video it's only important, that you 
> know there is a budget limit that you can set yourself. If it's side-wite or 
> not, is not important in the first place. Secondly in this version it's more 
> obvious that you can define the budget yourself. And thirdly, it's an 
> additional hint, that snowdrift is about monthly payments. I know, there are 
> already two, but as this is an important point I think it's ok to mention it 
> again.
> 
> 
> 
>


Hello Johannes,

good to hear from you and see you are following the latest development
closely! I'm looking forward to work with you from here on (creating
storyboards) once we have audio files.


Concerning your feedback:
I'm glad you bring this up as I had the exact same problem with "site-wide".

There is a trade-off between clarity and precision.
Adding the concept "site-wide vs. non-site-wide" is not required to
achieve what we want to achieve.

Many questions *will* get raised without doubt, but this video does not
need to answer them all or set things straight.
Being correct and concise trumps removing doubt at this scope.

It is *escpecially* problematic to raise that term when there is only
one site that is the very project promoting it.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-09 Thread Aaron Wolf
On 01/09/2017 09:41 AM, J.wuensch wrote:
> Hey guys,
> All in all it's pretty good! But there is one thing I noticed when I
> read the text to other people. It's the "site-wide" budget in part 7
> that seems to be a bit confusing.
> 
> 7. And your pledges stay active as long as they fit within your
> site-wide budget.
> 
> I would replace "your site-wide budget" with "your defined monthly budget":
> 
> 7.  And your pledges stay active as long as they fit within your defined
> monthly budget.
> 
> Why: Firstly, I think no one will get, what you mean by a "site-wide
> budget". It's just to abstract. I read it to two people and they didn't
> get that part... How the mechanism of the budget is working should be
> easily clarified on the website later. I think for the video it's only
> important, that you know there is a budget limit that you can set
> yourself. If it's side-wite or not, is not important in the first
> place.  Secondly in this version it's more obvious that you can define
> the budget yourself. And thirdly, it's an additional hint, that
> snowdrift is about monthly payments. I know, there are already two, but
> as this is an important point I think it's ok to mention it again.
> 
> 

Thanks for the reply, but "your defined monthly budget" is absolutely
not going to work. It's FAR FAR better for people to say "site-wide
budget? How does that work?" than to have the WRONG idea "oh, I get to
set a cap for how much I give to each project".

We are NOT offering people to cap each project, we are giving them ONE
overall site-wide (or system-wide, there are other wordings for these
things) budget. If the total of *all* their pledges goes past their
limit, then the project that grew will be dropped until they decide to
drop others instead or to change their budget limit. We don't have time
to explain that, but we don't want anyone to have the wrong idea that
you can have a per-project budget.




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-09 Thread J.wuensch
Hey guys,
All in all it's pretty good! But there is one thing I noticed when I read the 
text to other people. It's the "site-wide" budget in part 7 that seems to be a 
bit confusing.

7. And your pledges stay active as long as they fit within your site-wide 
budget.

I would replace "your site-wide budget" with "your defined monthly budget":

7. And your pledges stay active as long as they fit within your defined monthly 
budget.

Why: Firstly, I think no one will get, what you mean by a "site-wide budget". 
It's just to abstract. I read it to two people and they didn't get that part... 
How the mechanism of the budget is working should be easily clarified on the 
website later. I think for the video it's only important, that you know there 
is a budget limit that you can set yourself. If it's side-wite or not, is not 
important in the first place. Secondly in this version it's more obvious that 
you can define the budget yourself. And thirdly, it's an additional hint, that 
snowdrift is about monthly payments. I know, there are already two, but as this 
is an important point I think it's ok to mention it again.




Sent from [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.ch), encrypted email based in 
Switzerland.



---- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft
Local Time: 9. Januar 2017 3:50 AM
UTC Time: 9. Januar 2017 02:50
From: stephen.mic...@tufts.edu
To: Design discussion for Snowdrift.coop <design@lists.snowdrift.coop>, 
t...@lists.snowdrift.coop <t...@lists.snowdrift.coop>

On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 11:56 PM, Aaron Wolf <aa...@snowdrift.coop> wrote:


We're getting close!! We need to work on the last pre-sign-off line(s) to 
solidify this thing. I'm happy to suggest as a final draft for everything 
except the second-to-last section. SCRIPT: 1. Things like software, music, 
journalism, and research *can* be public goods, freely used and shared by 
*everyone*. 2. But instead, publishers typically add restrictions in order to 
secure funding. 3. Meanwhile, projects releasing their work under free and open 
terms struggle. 4. To address this dilemma, we developed a new fundraising 
method we call crowd**matching**. 5. Rather than donate alone, you pledge to 
make a monthly contribution of 1 cent for every 10 patrons who give to the same 
project with you. 6. 1,000 patrons donating $1 is $1,000, but with 5,000 
patrons at just $5 each, a project would receive $25,000 a month! 7. ??? [see 
notes below; something mentioning budget (probably vague, just giving idea that 
you can learn more reading the how-it-works page) and emphasizing the positive 
qualities of the system as a whole] 8. Join Snowdrift.coop today, and help 
clear the path to a free and open future! --- Aaron's thoughts on 7: * goal: an 
inspiring and informative vision of the system overall * must mention budget * 
avoid vague claims, buzzwords, marketing-speak in favor of factual informative 
content * the vision can emphasize any of: * pledging to many projects * only 
donating much to those that have buy-in from others / those projects "people 
value most" (consensus, avoiding fragmentation / a few successful projects is 
better than many failing ones) * a budget where projects that get *too* popular 
get cut off * no time here but ideal impression of how this mediates runaway 
growth, and a popular project doesn't *directly* cause the drop of another 
project * you have control to stay on-board with a super popular project by 
either (A) dropping others or (B) increasing your budget * you can observe over 
time to favor those projects that make the most impact (accountability) * your 
pledges are part of inviting others to pledge * providing sustainable, reliable 
salaries to project teams * we only have time for some of these things * 
"directs your budget to most-valued" ideas are misleading in that it only 
applies *before* hitting your limit. At your limit, projects that get popular 
will be dropped first. * To ensure people have a clear sense of budget or at 
least open questions and not misunderstandings, these are the implications to 
avoid: * wrong: you always give your whole budget * wrong: you can always keep 
donating without passing your limit (effectively reneging on the matching 
pledge) * wrong: you can set a different budget for each project * we have at 
most about 15 seconds for whatever best compromise of these things we can 
achieve

After more work today, the latest draft stands at:

```

1. Things like software, music, journalism, and research *can* be public goods, 
freely used and shared by *everyone*.

2. But instead, publishers typically add restrictions in order to secure 
funding.

3. Meanwhile, projects releasing their work under free and open terms struggle.

4. To enable the widespread cooperation needed to solve this dilemma, we 
developed a new fundraising method we call "crowdmatching&quo

Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2017-01-07 Thread Aaron Wolf
We're getting close!! We need to work on the last pre-sign-off line(s)
to solidify this thing.

I'm happy to suggest as a final draft for everything except the
second-to-last section.

SCRIPT:

1. Things like software, music, journalism, and research *can* be public
goods, freely used and shared by *everyone*.

2. But instead, publishers typically add restrictions in order to secure
funding.

3. Meanwhile, projects releasing their work under free and open terms
struggle.

4. To address this dilemma, we developed a new fundraising method we
call crowd**matching**.

5. Rather than donate alone, you pledge to make a monthly contribution
of 1 cent for every 10 patrons who give to the same project with you.

6. 1,000 patrons donating $1 is $1,000, but with 5,000 patrons at just
$5 each, a project would receive $25,000 a month!

7. ??? [see notes below; something mentioning budget (probably vague,
just giving idea that you can learn more reading the how-it-works page)
and emphasizing the positive qualities of the system as a whole]

8. Join Snowdrift.coop today, and help clear the path to a free and open
future!

---

Aaron's thoughts on 7:
* goal: an inspiring and informative vision of the system overall
* must mention budget
* avoid vague claims, buzzwords, marketing-speak in favor of factual
informative content
* the vision can emphasize any of:
* pledging to many projects
* only donating much to those that have buy-in from others /
those projects "people value most" (consensus, avoiding fragmentation /
a few successful projects is better than many failing ones)
* a budget where projects that get *too* popular get cut off
* no time here but ideal impression of how this mediates
runaway growth, and a popular project doesn't *directly* cause the drop
of another project
* you have control to stay on-board with a super popular project
by either (A) dropping others or (B) increasing your budget
* you can observe over time to favor those projects that make
the most impact (accountability)
* your pledges are part of inviting others to pledge
* providing sustainable, reliable salaries to project teams
* we only have time for some of these things
* "directs your budget to most-valued" ideas are misleading in that
it only applies *before* hitting your limit. At your limit, projects
that get popular will be dropped first.
*  To ensure people have a clear sense of budget or at least open
questions and not misunderstandings, these are the implications to avoid:
* wrong: you always give your whole budget
* wrong: you can always keep donating without passing your limit
(effectively reneging on the matching pledge)
* wrong: you can set a different budget for each project
* we have at most about 15 seconds for whatever best compromise of
these things we can achieve



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2016-12-26 Thread Aaron Wolf
On 12/26/2016 01:49 PM, mray wrote:
> I attach an older recording (2016-12-05) of the script.
> I'd like to not work on this the "e-mail" way if possible and hope there
> will be another meeting I can finally attend (sorry for missing the last
> ones!).
> 
> All in all I like the older one much better.
> 
> 

Thanks for sending that. Unfortunately, we still lost my other
intermediate version which never got captured in a live meeting, I don't
think.

Anyway, there are some aspects I like about the older script, but I
really prefer the new one in several respects. There are some aspects of
the old that are good and a synthesis of sorts is possible.

My schedule is pretty open at this point for further meetings in the
near future




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2016-12-24 Thread Stephen Michel
On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 1:10 PM, Aaron Wolf  
wrote:

On 12/23/2016 10:31 PM, Stephen Michel wrote:

 Additional thought: As we go through this, we need to think of what
 illustration we are going to pair with each segment.


I'm not actually sure if we should do this coincidentally or
sequentially, but I see some arguments both ways. I did have some
thoughts as I mentioned.


 PER-LINE NOTES (> is the script and * is commentary for line 
above):


 And you control your budget by setting a monthly limit for the
 system overall.


 What's the pithy shorter version?


One version:

First, you set an overall monthly budget limit. Then, [the stuff about
pledging]

Another:

Your donations are limited by your overall budget setting.

Another:

Your budget setting limits your overall monthly donations.

Another:

We only process pledges that stay within your monthly budget limit.

Overall, this sentence has *lots* of acceptable variations. I've not
come up with one I love and will bother really defending. But we 
*need*

some mention of budget limit and to clarify that it's overall and not
per-project. In my experience, about half of people do not assume
there's a cap and think we might just be crazy (and half assume 
there's

a cap and feel it doesn't need to be stated in a summary). We need it
included in some form. With the right illustration, it can be short 
and

pithy.

There needs to be *some* transition from problem to solution. I agree
that having the sort of qualitative assertions on both sides of the
explanation is kinda split up and also longer than strictly 
necessary. I

would lean toward removing the "empowers… you care about" part if
necessary, although I kind of like it.


 I think that the part where we discuss setting a limit is ultimately
 unnecessary. We need the limit to make people feel comfortable 
pledging,
 not to sell the message of, "crowdmatching is the key reason that 
this
 is NEW and CAN actually do this! Believe!! Be inspired!" I think if 
the

 very next place someone looks on the site mentions the limit, that's
 sufficient.

 Also, it's really hard to fit this sentence in without breaking the 
flow

 of those paragraphs.


I think it's not safe to have no limit mention, close to certain. But 
I

agree it doesn't lead well into the positive vision. Maybe the "First,
limit… pledge…" is the better order.


 For each project you wish to support, you pledge to give a monthly

 donation of
 1 cent for every 10 patrons who donate with you. 1,000 patrons 
donating $1
 means $1,000, but 5,000 patrons at just $5 each would give a 
project a

 $25,000

 monthly income!


 * I think separating these sentences makes the audience work harder 
than

 they need to, to put 2 and 2 together. So, let's put them together.



I agree that they are cognitively best when they flow together. So,
maybe introducing the budget limit *before* the pledge is the 
smoothest

and simplest option.


I don't like mentioning the limit before people know how the system 
works. It puts too much focus on the limit, imo.

I also don't like it near the end, for similar reasons.

Basically, I want the absolute minimum impact mention of a limit while 
still including it.
I actually think that works well if we sandwich it between two related 
sentences, even if we use a less pithy version.


Here's a middle ground between the two. I also made a trivial fix for 
"provides.. provide".


```
SCRIPT V3

Things like software, music, movies, journalism, and research *can* be
public goods, freely used and shared by *everyone*.

But instead, publishers typically add restrictions in order to secure
funding. Meanwhile, projects releasing their work under free and open
terms struggle.

Our innovative crowd*matching* system provides a new way to generate
significant funding for public goods at little individual cost.

For each project you wish to support, you pledge to give a monthly 
donation of 1 cent for

every 10 patrons who donate with you.

And you control your budget by setting a monthly limit for the system
overall.

1,000 patrons donating $1 means $1,000, but 5,000 patrons at just
$5 each would give a project a $25,000 monthly income!

*Matching* provides the necessary incentive to encourage more patrons to
join, and monthly donations hold projects accountable.

Join Snowdrift.coop today, and help clear the path to a free and open
future!
```
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2016-12-24 Thread Aaron Wolf
On 12/23/2016 10:31 PM, Stephen Michel wrote:
> Additional thought: As we go through this, we need to think of what
> illustration we are going to pair with each segment.
> 

I'm not actually sure if we should do this coincidentally or
sequentially, but I see some arguments both ways. I did have some
thoughts as I mentioned.

>> PER-LINE NOTES (> is the script and * is commentary for line above):
>>
>> And you control your budget by setting a monthly limit for the
>> system overall. 
>>
> What's the pithy shorter version?
> 
One version:

First, you set an overall monthly budget limit. Then, [the stuff about
pledging]

Another:

Your donations are limited by your overall budget setting.

Another:

Your budget setting limits your overall monthly donations.

Another:

We only process pledges that stay within your monthly budget limit.

Overall, this sentence has *lots* of acceptable variations. I've not
come up with one I love and will bother really defending. But we *need*
some mention of budget limit and to clarify that it's overall and not
per-project. In my experience, about half of people do not assume
there's a cap and think we might just be crazy (and half assume there's
a cap and feel it doesn't need to be stated in a summary). We need it
included in some form. With the right illustration, it can be short and
pithy.

>> Join Snowdrift.coop today, and help clear the path to a free and
>> open future! 
>>
> I love this phrase. But I love it *because* I understand the snowdrift
> metaphor. This is someone's first exposure to snowdrift, and we haven't
> explained the metaphor yet; in this context, it's much less impactful.
> 

I agree it's not super impactful to those who don't know the metaphor,
but it hints at it. It provides an opening and continuity to reference
the snowdrift dilemma in later things. I.e. foreshadowing. I wrote and
like it knowing that it won't be immediately meaningful to everyone. The
vague idea of clearing obstacles / moving forward is still present.

> I'm concerned about the semantic flow of the middle, from an
> illustration perspective. We mention our crowdmatching system and its
> benefits (abstract), then give the specs, assuage fears with talk of a
> limit, more abstract benefits, and finally another example. I think if
> we combine the bits about "supporting public goods you care about" and
> "significant impact at little individual cost", and combine the parts
> with concrete numbers, we'll end up with something more concise and also
> easier to make visualizations for.
> 

If other people think it could work, I'm okay with removing most of the
"empowers…" sentence. Something really pithy like "Introducing our
innovative crowd*matching* system:"

There needs to be *some* transition from problem to solution. I agree
that having the sort of qualitative assertions on both sides of the
explanation is kinda split up and also longer than strictly necessary. I
would lean toward removing the "empowers… you care about" part if
necessary, although I kind of like it.

> I think that the part where we discuss setting a limit is ultimately
> unnecessary. We need the limit to make people feel comfortable pledging,
> not to sell the message of, "crowdmatching is the key reason that this
> is NEW and CAN actually do this! Believe!! Be inspired!" I think if the
> very next place someone looks on the site mentions the limit, that's
> sufficient.
> 
> Also, it's really hard to fit this sentence in without breaking the flow
> of those paragraphs.

I think it's not safe to have no limit mention, close to certain. But I
agree it doesn't lead well into the positive vision. Maybe the "First,
limit… pledge…" is the better order.

> NEW SCRIPT SHORT:
> 
> Things like software, music, movies, journalism, and research *can* be
> public goods, freely used and shared by *everyone*.
> 
> But instead, publishers typically add restrictions in order to secure
> funding. Meanwhile, projects releasing their work under free and open
> terms struggle.
> 
> Our innovative crowd*matching* system empowers you to join with
> others in supporting the public goods *you* care about, creating
> significant impact at little individual cost.
> 

Not bad, but the sentence is just too long.

> For each project you wish to support, you pledge to give a monthly
> donation of 1 cent for every 10 patrons who donate with you. 1,000
> patrons donating $1 means $1,000, but 5,000 patrons at just $5 each
> would give a project a $25,000 monthly income!
> 
> *Matching* provides the necessary incentive to encourage more patrons to
> join, and monthly donations hold projects accountable.
> 
> Join Snowdrift.coop today, and help fund public goods, together!
> ```

"help fund public goods, together" isn't very compelling and is
redundant. There's nothing *wrong* with the "clear the path" message
even if it's not something people immediately associate with the
snowdrift dilemma.

>> For each project you wish to 

Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2016-12-24 Thread Stephen Michel
On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 1:31 AM, Stephen Michel 
 wrote:

> Our innovative crowd*matching* system empowers you to join with
> others in supporting the public goods *you* care about, creating
> significant impact at little individual cost.

* Shorter, and doesn't lose anything important that I can tell.


I was tired when I wrote this last night and forgot to mention that I 
also think this bit could be reworded to be shorter still. I wasn't 
trying to wordsmith anything as Aaron is better at that than I; the 
important part is the change to the structure.
___
Design mailing list
Design@lists.snowdrift.coop
https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/design


Re: [Snowdrift-design] new video script draft

2016-12-23 Thread Stephen Michel
PREFACE: I agree with nearly everything you said; If I didn't 
explicitly disagree, consider me agreed.


On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 4:38 PM, Aaron Wolf  
wrote:


```
NEW SCRIPT:

Things like software, music, movies, journalism, and research *can* be
public goods, freely used and shared by *everyone*.

But instead, publishers typically add restrictions in order to secure
funding. Meanwhile, projects releasing their work under free and open
terms struggle.

Our innovative crowd*matching* system empowers you to join with others
in supporting the public goods *you* care about.

For each project you wish to support, you pledge to give a monthly
donation of 1 cent for every 10 patrons who donate with you.

And you control your budget by setting a monthly limit for the system
overall.

Working together, we can have significant impact at little individual
cost. 1,000 patrons donating $1 means $1,000, but 5,000 patrons at 
just

$5 each would give a project a $25,000 monthly income!

*Matching* provides the necessary incentive to encourage more patrons 
to

join, and monthly donations hold projects accountable.

Join Snowdrift.coop today, and help clear the path to a free and open
future!
```

THOUGHTS/EXPLANATION:

First, this is a bit wordier and goes by a bit fast just to keep it
under 1 minute. I know this is stretching the acceptable length. Maybe
we can find ways to shorten it that are worth the benefit of being
shorter, but I want each decision to consider whether that's worth the
trade-off.

The overall idea is for people to actually grasp the system and have 
the

sense that this really isn't another copy of what they've seen before.


Additional thought: As we go through this, we need to think of what 
illustration we are going to pair with each segment.



PER-LINE NOTES (> is the script and * is commentary for line above):

 And you control your budget by setting a monthly limit for the 
system

 overall.


* I tried to fit in a statement about what your choices are when you 
hit

your budget, but there's just no way to fit it in unless we accepted a
longer video time. Otherwise, I find this wording very clear, even
though a pithy shorter version is possible.


What's the pithy shorter version?

 Join Snowdrift.coop today, and help clear the path to a free and 
open

 future!


* This fit as a better place to mention the site again, and we can 
then

tie in the snowdrift dilemma with an illustration showing characters
coming to join together and shovel snow.

o f
I love this phrase. But I love it *because* I understand the snowdrift 
metaphor. This is someone's first exposure to snowdrift, and we haven't 
explained the metaphor yet; in this context, it's much less impactful.



CONCLUSION: I'm happy with the semantic flow of everything and happy
enough with the wording of all of this. I always love when someone 
gives

feedback I see as even greater improvement. I wish this were a bit
shorter but also don't want to lose any element.


I'm concerned about the semantic flow of the middle, from an 
illustration perspective. We mention our crowdmatching system and its 
benefits (abstract), then give the specs, assuage fears with talk of a 
limit, more abstract benefits, and finally another example. I think if 
we combine the bits about "supporting public goods you care about" and 
"significant impact at little individual cost", and combine the parts 
with concrete numbers, we'll end up with something more concise and 
also easier to make visualizations for.


I think that the part where we discuss setting a limit is ultimately 
unnecessary. We need the limit to make people feel comfortable 
pledging, not to sell the message of, "crowdmatching is the key reason 
that this is NEW and CAN actually do this! Believe!! Be inspired!" I 
think if the very next place someone looks on the site mentions the 
limit, that's sufficient.


Also, it's really hard to fit this sentence in without breaking the 
flow of those paragraphs.


We could go back and compare this to other drafts, but this is the 
first
one that I feel is fully effective all the way through and as a 
complete

unit.


I think it can and should still be improved a little, but is good 
enough that we can use it, if push comes to shove and we haven't found 
anything better yet.


Based on all that, here's my attempt. There's a couple places (noted 
below) where the wording is very much not final. That's fine.


```
NEW SCRIPT SHORT:

Things like software, music, movies, journalism, and research *can* be
public goods, freely used and shared by *everyone*.

But instead, publishers typically add restrictions in order to secure
funding. Meanwhile, projects releasing their work under free and open
terms struggle.

Our innovative crowd*matching* system empowers you to join with
others in supporting the public goods *you* care about, creating
significant impact at little individual cost.

For each project you wish to support, you pledge to