"Free the Commons" is a nice, short, relevant slogan. It's a call-to-action.
But freeing in what sense? What commons? What are "the commons"? And
technically, "commons" are rivalrous shared resources, not actually the
public goods which are technically what we're working with.
I just was chatting
On 09/19/2016 01:57 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> "Free the Commons" is a nice, short, relevant slogan. It's a call-to-action.
>
> But freeing in what sense? What commons? What are "the commons"? And
> technically, "commons" are rivalrous shared resources, not actually the
> public goods which are techni
On 09/19/2016 04:37 PM, Michael Siepmann wrote:
> On 09/19/2016 01:57 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>> "Free the Commons" is a nice, short, relevant slogan. It's a call-to-action.
>>
>> But freeing in what sense? What commons? What are "the commons"? And
>> technically, "commons" are rivalrous shared resou
What about dropping "fund"? "Crowdmatching for public goods"
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> On 09/19/2016 04:37 PM, Michael Siepmann wrote:
>> On 09/19/2016 01:57 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
>>> "Free the Commons" is a nice, short, relevant slogan. It's a call-to-action.
>>>
>>>
On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 17:25:47 -0700
David Thomas wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Aaron Wolf
> wrote:
> > On 09/19/2016 04:37 PM, Michael Siepmann wrote:
> >> On 09/19/2016 01:57 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> >>> "Free the Commons" is a nice, short, relevant slogan. It's a
> >>> call-to-act
On 09/19/2016 06:45 PM, William Hale wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 17:25:47 -0700
> David Thomas wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Aaron Wolf
>> wrote:
>>> On 09/19/2016 04:37 PM, Michael Siepmann wrote:
On 09/19/2016 01:57 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> "Free the Commons" is a nice
On 09/19/2016 06:47 PM, Michael Siepmann wrote:
> On 09/19/2016 06:45 PM, William Hale wrote:
>> On Mon, 19 Sep 2016 17:25:47 -0700
>> David Thomas wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 5:00 PM, Aaron Wolf
>>> wrote:
On 09/19/2016 04:37 PM, Michael Siepmann wrote:
> On 09/19/2016 01:57 PM
> So, I'd accept "crowdmatching for public goods"
I really like "crowdmatching for public goods". I suspect that if I read that
without context, I'd take funding as implied, and be surprised if the thing
with that slogan didn't involve funding.
> although I *slightly*
> worry that wording could
On 09/19/2016 08:41 PM, Mike Linksvayer wrote:
>> So, I'd accept "crowdmatching for public goods"
>
> I really like "crowdmatching for public goods". I suspect that if I read that
> without context, I'd take funding as implied, and be surprised if the thing
> with that slogan didn't involve fund
