Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Michael Siepmann wrote: On 09/20/2016 08:40 AM, Aaron Wolf wrote: On 09/20/2016 01:04 AM, mray wrote: On 20.09.2016 02:25, David Thomas wrote: What about dropping "fund"? "Crowdmatching for public goods" What about dropping "for"? "Crowdmatching for public goods" "Crowdmatching public goods" You could say we ultimately crowdmatch for everybody, not for public goods. Omitting "for" also makes Crowdfunding more of verb than a noun, which is a good thing; more active and less static. Michael rightly notes that "fund" clarifies what we mean without depending on new words. Mike rightly notes that it implies some sort of funding. I think when we introduce a new word we also need to let it do some lifting, otherwise we shouldn't introduce it. Redundancy in a slogan is bad. Short is good. I find "crowdmatching" as a noun is a little easier to parse when it has no context (i.e. isn't in a clear sentence). Also "crowdmatching for public goods" works if you parse it as a verb or a noun, whereas "crowdmatching public goods" makes anyone who starts parsing as a noun do the mental work of shifting it to a verb. The main reason I'm hesitant about (but not totally opposed to) "crowdmatching public goods" is that the matching isn't matching of public goods to one another, but it could read that way. It's patrons who match each other. If we were to do without a preposition, we could use: "public goods crowdmatching" To me, that's a nice effect but feels more dense and jargony. Of all the options proposed "Crowdmatching for public goods" feels like the least mental work to read and parse. The preposition helps me chunk it into two clauses. It's a noun (or maybe a verb) with a preposition clause. That's easier to process than parsing one jargony, heavy verb clause. "Crowdmatching for public goods" works for me. I'm persuaded by this recent discussion that it's probably OK to omit "to fund" and I like this less wordy version. The main (only?) job of the slogan are to peak the interest of someone who does not already know what we are, preferably by succinctly communicating the essence of what we do. Therefore, I don't think anyone on this list can use their intuition to judge whether "crowdmatching" (or "public goods") does that job effectively. Of course "crowdmatching" has the right connotations in the context of Snowdrift! On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote: On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 1:03 PM, Denver Gingerich wrote: Overall I like that slogan. There is one point I haven't seen come up in discussion (apologies if I missed it) but should be highlighted. I don't have a strong personal opinion on how important this point is, but because of whose point it is and the projects Snowdrift.coop aims to support, it should at least be mentioned: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#DigitalGoods Now the slogan doesn't say "digital goods", but it does use "goods" in a way that to me felt slightly confusing initially (and would probably be more confusing to most people, since they spend less time thinking about software than the majority of us). I don't know if there are good alternatives, though. "Public works" isn't an option since it has its own meaning ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_works ) and "public works of authorship" feels a bit long to me. Anyway, I just wanted to highlight this. To me, the current slogan shouldn't be rejected solely on the basis of this, but it at least warrants a review by people more connected to the project than I. Thanks for the thoughts, Denver! To address the concern: Yes, the metaphor of "goods" inherently causes problems in terms of thinking about non-rivalrous works, but actually "public goods" is the precise, accepted term in economics for non-rivalrous, non-exclusive works. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good So, it's not just a sorta-good description, it's *the* correct term for precisely what we're focusing on. Continuing the line of reasoning above: let's take a hypothetical situation where "public goods" is doing a less effective job at peaking people's interest by communicating the general idea than another option would be, despite being the technically precise term. (I suspect this is the case, but don't trust my intuition on this, either). Is being technically correct worth the cost, or should we consider other options? There are three parts to the slogan: Crowdmatching, public goods, and (optional) filler words that tie them together. Mix and match: [crowdmatching/crowdmatched] [to/for] [fund/funds/funding] [public/digital/unrestricted/FLO/post-scarcity] [goods/works/economy] I am not sure how to turn it into a good slogan, but I like the idea of not talking about goods specifically but talking about the post-scarcity economy more generally. That's a concept that people are already familiar with (although it's slightly
Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
On 09/20/2016 10:03 AM, Denver Gingerich wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 07:40:31AM -0700, Aaron Wolf wrote: >> Of all the >> options proposed "Crowdmatching for public goods" feels like the least >> mental work to read and parse. > > Overall I like that slogan. > > There is one point I haven't seen come up in discussion (apologies if I > missed it) but should be highlighted. I don't have a strong personal opinion > on how important this point is, but because of whose point it is and the > projects Snowdrift.coop aims to support, it should at least be mentioned: > > https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#DigitalGoods > > Now the slogan doesn't say "digital goods", but it does use "goods" in a way > that to me felt slightly confusing initially (and would probably be more > confusing to most people, since they spend less time thinking about software > than the majority of us). > > I don't know if there are good alternatives, though. "Public works" isn't an > option since it has its own meaning ( > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_works ) and "public works of authorship" > feels a bit long to me. > > Anyway, I just wanted to highlight this. To me, the current slogan shouldn't > be rejected solely on the basis of this, but it at least warrants a review by > people more connected to the project than I. > > Denver > http://ossguy.com/ Thanks for the thoughts, Denver! To address the concern: Yes, the metaphor of "goods" inherently causes problems in terms of thinking about non-rivalrous works, but actually "public goods" is the precise, accepted term in economics for non-rivalrous, non-exclusive works. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good So, it's not just a sorta-good description, it's *the* correct term for precisely what we're focusing on. Cheers, Aaron signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 07:40:31AM -0700, Aaron Wolf wrote: > Of all the > options proposed "Crowdmatching for public goods" feels like the least > mental work to read and parse. Overall I like that slogan. There is one point I haven't seen come up in discussion (apologies if I missed it) but should be highlighted. I don't have a strong personal opinion on how important this point is, but because of whose point it is and the projects Snowdrift.coop aims to support, it should at least be mentioned: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html#DigitalGoods Now the slogan doesn't say "digital goods", but it does use "goods" in a way that to me felt slightly confusing initially (and would probably be more confusing to most people, since they spend less time thinking about software than the majority of us). I don't know if there are good alternatives, though. "Public works" isn't an option since it has its own meaning ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_works ) and "public works of authorship" feels a bit long to me. Anyway, I just wanted to highlight this. To me, the current slogan shouldn't be rejected solely on the basis of this, but it at least warrants a review by people more connected to the project than I. Denver http://ossguy.com/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJX4WvRAAoJEKiI8SFfNqdylKwP/jXdiYgGGiGFenGzho7TtGx8 CvSpPtQ9HSrbdAttLPE1pNBKKDtNvfp0NBr7U56qqvJjF5PpR6SKzorcjWu/9KZO 60PtEJE1NMIsF1M68G9qfpV1ccKH2EqTNg6ZuTQFK4+knsKhmzpTm1tfBghfoEn5 AZC4Nl/5qvP+bb6c8VMdhUVhuUuU4AljJXWP+gsMdWlTHKd9Iw+ugYRRJcPDn8Up i+7qBG2DiT0l/BXkVgW9N4vcbUFVPQastFq+0but4gZAAnh55wHpJIEsw9Nd8rTj yqjv79dYhDUOuGwA9KOl+GonOPJaZsRAfxkMo9GE0zsWQ/v1JtBlvOKjATrVMv+t wF++WNOVBYfknEKMFD4G7LvQmxRIY6NrReWslLZI4/wVe9OxJehgcWRyaZmT7cWj k3lPMr60XcWnatixuE6yUu7fqEVhbgjzUIj3gW2s8ViuEmJS4sptuolToVoEvO0+ J4vO3FLGZVio3A+b+T3LzgijnDzJ/Pysq8DhjSq9otHJ086ufjVRaqZkZwtvyewu iZpktVhNsSpQvNhlubLpsj8p9MiSe1Py96Dv2AEWjAbB8Hkv1bkYXcsSu1gj4+cf m3b1L4e7ptn3WAnf1ZNi+8B9QibzgAKSNCQoxG/07RzGiZOqfeOgIV9kIyWoA9JW DL0l7EMlgScKABkmDB0x =K4V+ -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
On 09/20/2016 08:40 AM, Aaron Wolf wrote: > On 09/20/2016 01:04 AM, mray wrote: >> On 20.09.2016 02:25, David Thomas wrote: >>> What about dropping "fund"? "Crowdmatching for public goods" >> What about dropping "for"? >> >> "Crowdmatching for public goods" >> "Crowdmatching public goods" >> >> You could say we ultimately crowdmatch for everybody, not for public >> goods. Omitting "for" also makes Crowdfunding more of verb than a noun, >> which is a good thing; more active and less static. >> >> Michael rightly notes that "fund" clarifies what we mean without >> depending on new words. Mike rightly notes that it implies some sort of >> funding. I think when we introduce a new word we also need to let it do >> some lifting, otherwise we shouldn't introduce it. Redundancy in a >> slogan is bad. Short is good. >> > I find "crowdmatching" as a noun is a little easier to parse when it has > no context (i.e. isn't in a clear sentence). Also "crowdmatching for > public goods" works if you parse it as a verb or a noun, whereas > "crowdmatching public goods" makes anyone who starts parsing as a noun > do the mental work of shifting it to a verb. > > The main reason I'm hesitant about (but not totally opposed to) > "crowdmatching public goods" is that the matching isn't matching of > public goods to one another, but it could read that way. It's patrons > who match each other. > > If we were to do without a preposition, we could use: > > "public goods crowdmatching" > > To me, that's a nice effect but feels more dense and jargony. Of all the > options proposed "Crowdmatching for public goods" feels like the least > mental work to read and parse. The preposition helps me chunk it into > two clauses. It's a noun (or maybe a verb) with a preposition clause. > That's easier to process than parsing one jargony, heavy verb clause. > "Crowdmatching for public goods" works for me. I'm persuaded by this recent discussion that it's probably OK to omit "to fund" and I like this less wordy version. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
On 09/20/2016 01:04 AM, mray wrote: > On 20.09.2016 02:25, David Thomas wrote: >> What about dropping "fund"? "Crowdmatching for public goods" > > What about dropping "for"? > > "Crowdmatching for public goods" > "Crowdmatching public goods" > > You could say we ultimately crowdmatch for everybody, not for public > goods. Omitting "for" also makes Crowdfunding more of verb than a noun, > which is a good thing; more active and less static. > > Michael rightly notes that "fund" clarifies what we mean without > depending on new words. Mike rightly notes that it implies some sort of > funding. I think when we introduce a new word we also need to let it do > some lifting, otherwise we shouldn't introduce it. Redundancy in a > slogan is bad. Short is good. > I find "crowdmatching" as a noun is a little easier to parse when it has no context (i.e. isn't in a clear sentence). Also "crowdmatching for public goods" works if you parse it as a verb or a noun, whereas "crowdmatching public goods" makes anyone who starts parsing as a noun do the mental work of shifting it to a verb. The main reason I'm hesitant about (but not totally opposed to) "crowdmatching public goods" is that the matching isn't matching of public goods to one another, but it could read that way. It's patrons who match each other. If we were to do without a preposition, we could use: "public goods crowdmatching" To me, that's a nice effect but feels more dense and jargony. Of all the options proposed "Crowdmatching for public goods" feels like the least mental work to read and parse. The preposition helps me chunk it into two clauses. It's a noun (or maybe a verb) with a preposition clause. That's easier to process than parsing one jargony, heavy verb clause. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
On 20.09.2016 10:04, mray wrote: > On 20.09.2016 02:25, David Thomas wrote: >> What about dropping "fund"? "Crowdmatching for public goods" > > What about dropping "for"? > > "Crowdmatching for public goods" > "Crowdmatching public goods" > > You could say we ultimately crowdmatch for everybody, not for public > goods. Omitting "for" also makes Crowdfunding more of verb than a noun, > which is a good thing; more active and less static. > > Michael rightly notes that "fund" clarifies what we mean without > depending on new words. Mike rightly notes that it implies some sort of > funding. Ooops, I meant to say "Mike rightly notes that it (CROWDMATCHING) implies some sort of funding" > I think when we introduce a new word we also need to let it do > some lifting, otherwise we shouldn't introduce it. Redundancy in a > slogan is bad. Short is good. > > signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
On 20.09.2016 02:25, David Thomas wrote: > What about dropping "fund"? "Crowdmatching for public goods" What about dropping "for"? "Crowdmatching for public goods" "Crowdmatching public goods" You could say we ultimately crowdmatch for everybody, not for public goods. Omitting "for" also makes Crowdfunding more of verb than a noun, which is a good thing; more active and less static. Michael rightly notes that "fund" clarifies what we mean without depending on new words. Mike rightly notes that it implies some sort of funding. I think when we introduce a new word we also need to let it do some lifting, otherwise we shouldn't introduce it. Redundancy in a slogan is bad. Short is good. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
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 funding. > >> although I *slightly* >> worry that wording could be inferred to mean that you could have >> crowdmatching for other things. The message I wish to send is "[funding] >> public goods through crowdmatching" where [funding] could be other >> assistance if we expanded. > > I don't think any amount of words will prevent others from using the term > crowdmatching for exclusive goods. I wish nobody would use the term > crowdfunding to describe anything other than funding public goods. "Match" is > good because it conveys very simply how the mechanism is different, not > because it is a yet-unspoiled term. "Crowdmatching for public goods" very > nicely communicates what Snowdrift.coop will soon do, I hope. > > Mike > Okay, Mike convinced me. I think we should embrace "Crowdmatching for public goods" signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
> 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 be inferred to mean that you could have > crowdmatching for other things. The message I wish to send is "[funding] > public goods through crowdmatching" where [funding] could be other > assistance if we expanded. I don't think any amount of words will prevent others from using the term crowdmatching for exclusive goods. I wish nobody would use the term crowdfunding to describe anything other than funding public goods. "Match" is good because it conveys very simply how the mechanism is different, not because it is a yet-unspoiled term. "Crowdmatching for public goods" very nicely communicates what Snowdrift.coop will soon do, I hope. Mike ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
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, 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 technically what we're >> working with. >> >> I just was chatting with Robert and ended up saying "I don't >> think we'll come up with much better, but the idea we want to >> express is something like 'Crowdmatching to fund public goods'" >> >> Well, what do you think? >> >> ** Crowdmatching to fund public goods ** >> >> It's longer and wordier than "free the commons" but is more >> accurate. It gets right away into our use of 'crowdmatching' and >> clarifies that it's for fundraising, and uses "public goods" >> correctly. I'd think a reader would immediately say "what's >> crowdmatching?" and "what are public goods?" at which point those >> are indeed *the* two questions we want people to ask and that we >> want to answer concisely in order to introduce Snowdrift.coop. > I strongly agree. I while ago I suggested "Catalyzing creation of > public goods" among other ideas for a new tagline. "Catalyzing > creation..." was definitely too vague, but the term "crowdmatching" > didn't occur to me until a few months later. I think this new > combination of "crowdmatching", "fund", and "public goods" is > excellent and should be a big help in quickly giving people a > basic understanding of what Snowdrift.coop is about. > > Some alternatives of the same content: Crowdmatching to fund public goods Crowdmatch funding of public goods Crowdmatched funding of public goods Crowdmatch funding for public goods Crowdmatched funding for public goods Crowdmatching funding of public goods Crowdmatching funding for public goods Crowdmatching funds for public goods Public goods funding through crowdmatching Funding public goods through crowdmatching Crowdmatching funds public goods Incidentally, the only shorter one than my initial suggestion is a stranger grammar to parse because it's a complete sentence instead of just a verb clause or a noun clause. I think a clause is better than a sentence. So, it looks like the first suggestion may be best anyway. >>> What about dropping "fund"? "Crowdmatching for public goods" >>> >> (cleaned up message order for mailinglist) >> >> The shorter options I see are: >> >> Crowdmatching to fund public goods >> Crowdmatching funds public goods >> Crowdmatching for public goods >> Crowdmatching the public goods >> Crowdmatching of public goods >> Crowdmatching public goods >> >> The first two keep that inclusion of funding which I do see as >> important. >> >> I like the idea of switching slogans to include crowdmatching and >> public goods. Especially before the upcoming launch! >> > > I agree that "fund" is important. If "Crowdmatching" becomes a well > known term, as "Crowdfunding" has, then "Crowdmatching for public goods" > could work, but at this point I think it needs to specify that it's > about funding. > > I think "Crowdmatching to fund..." is better than "Crowdmatched > funding..." because the emphasis should be on the core thing > Snowdrift.coop does - i.e. crowdmatching. Using the word "funding" > makes it sound of interest more to recipients of funding than to > patrons, and sounds rather as if Snowdrift.coop itself is the source of > funds. The biggest population we want the tagline to appeal to is > patrons, who are the actual ones doing the funding. > > I still think the first version is best: Crowdmatching to fund public goods > > While I agree and would vote for "Crowdmatching to fund public goods" if we had a vote right now, I'm seriously considering David's suggestion of "Crowdmatching for public goods" Two thoughts: 1. I *wish* we could always imply the idea that crowdmatching is something you would never and should never do for anything *other* than public goods. I don't know in practice how that affects our choices, I just want everyone to keep it in mind. I want the world to believe it to be fundamentally wrong to crowdmatch for anything that *isn't* a public good. I want them to believe both that it would be unethical *and* that it makes no sense economically or socially or anything (why do you need people to match each other if they have enough individual incentive anyway? Crowdmatching is itself something that is only needed to solve the public goods dilem
Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
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, 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 with Robert and ended up saying "I don't > think we'll come up with much better, but the idea we want to > express is something like 'Crowdmatching to fund public goods'" > > Well, what do you think? > > ** Crowdmatching to fund public goods ** > > It's longer and wordier than "free the commons" but is more > accurate. It gets right away into our use of 'crowdmatching' and > clarifies that it's for fundraising, and uses "public goods" > correctly. I'd think a reader would immediately say "what's > crowdmatching?" and "what are public goods?" at which point those > are indeed *the* two questions we want people to ask and that we > want to answer concisely in order to introduce Snowdrift.coop. I strongly agree. I while ago I suggested "Catalyzing creation of public goods" among other ideas for a new tagline. "Catalyzing creation..." was definitely too vague, but the term "crowdmatching" didn't occur to me until a few months later. I think this new combination of "crowdmatching", "fund", and "public goods" is excellent and should be a big help in quickly giving people a basic understanding of what Snowdrift.coop is about. >>> Some alternatives of the same content: >>> >>> Crowdmatching to fund public goods >>> Crowdmatch funding of public goods >>> Crowdmatched funding of public goods >>> Crowdmatch funding for public goods >>> Crowdmatched funding for public goods >>> Crowdmatching funding of public goods >>> Crowdmatching funding for public goods >>> Crowdmatching funds for public goods >>> Public goods funding through crowdmatching >>> Funding public goods through crowdmatching >>> Crowdmatching funds public goods >>> >>> Incidentally, the only shorter one than my initial suggestion is a >>> stranger grammar to parse because it's a complete sentence instead >>> of just a verb clause or a noun clause. I think a clause is better >>> than a sentence. So, it looks like the first suggestion may be best >>> anyway. >>> >> What about dropping "fund"? "Crowdmatching for public goods" >> > (cleaned up message order for mailinglist) > > The shorter options I see are: > > Crowdmatching to fund public goods > Crowdmatching funds public goods > Crowdmatching for public goods > Crowdmatching the public goods > Crowdmatching of public goods > Crowdmatching public goods > > The first two keep that inclusion of funding which I do see as > important. > > I like the idea of switching slogans to include crowdmatching and > public goods. Especially before the upcoming launch! > I agree that "fund" is important. If "Crowdmatching" becomes a well known term, as "Crowdfunding" has, then "Crowdmatching for public goods" could work, but at this point I think it needs to specify that it's about funding. I think "Crowdmatching to fund..." is better than "Crowdmatched funding..." because the emphasis should be on the core thing Snowdrift.coop does - i.e. crowdmatching. Using the word "funding" makes it sound of interest more to recipients of funding than to patrons, and sounds rather as if Snowdrift.coop itself is the source of funds. The biggest population we want the tagline to appeal to is patrons, who are the actual ones doing the funding. I still think the first version is best: Crowdmatching to fund public goods signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
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-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 with Robert and ended up saying "I don't > >>> think we'll come up with much better, but the idea we want to > >>> express is something like 'Crowdmatching to fund public goods'" > >>> > >>> Well, what do you think? > >>> > >>> ** Crowdmatching to fund public goods ** > >>> > >>> It's longer and wordier than "free the commons" but is more > >>> accurate. It gets right away into our use of 'crowdmatching' and > >>> clarifies that it's for fundraising, and uses "public goods" > >>> correctly. I'd think a reader would immediately say "what's > >>> crowdmatching?" and "what are public goods?" at which point those > >>> are indeed *the* two questions we want people to ask and that we > >>> want to answer concisely in order to introduce Snowdrift.coop. > >> > >> I strongly agree. I while ago I suggested "Catalyzing creation of > >> public goods" among other ideas for a new tagline. "Catalyzing > >> creation..." was definitely too vague, but the term "crowdmatching" > >> didn't occur to me until a few months later. I think this new > >> combination of "crowdmatching", "fund", and "public goods" is > >> excellent and should be a big help in quickly giving people a > >> basic understanding of what Snowdrift.coop is about. > >> > >> > > > > Some alternatives of the same content: > > > > Crowdmatching to fund public goods > > Crowdmatch funding of public goods > > Crowdmatched funding of public goods > > Crowdmatch funding for public goods > > Crowdmatched funding for public goods > > Crowdmatching funding of public goods > > Crowdmatching funding for public goods > > Crowdmatching funds for public goods > > Public goods funding through crowdmatching > > Funding public goods through crowdmatching > > Crowdmatching funds public goods > > > > Incidentally, the only shorter one than my initial suggestion is a > > stranger grammar to parse because it's a complete sentence instead > > of just a verb clause or a noun clause. I think a clause is better > > than a sentence. So, it looks like the first suggestion may be best > > anyway. > > > > What about dropping "fund"? "Crowdmatching for public goods" > (cleaned up message order for mailinglist) The shorter options I see are: Crowdmatching to fund public goods Crowdmatching funds public goods Crowdmatching for public goods Crowdmatching the public goods Crowdmatching of public goods Crowdmatching public goods The first two keep that inclusion of funding which I do see as important. I like the idea of switching slogans to include crowdmatching and public goods. Especially before the upcoming launch! -- William Hale aka Salt Community Director Snowdrift.coop "Free the Commons" <-- maybe not for much longer ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
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. >>> >>> 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 with Robert and ended up saying "I don't think we'll >>> come up with much better, but the idea we want to express is something >>> like 'Crowdmatching to fund public goods'" >>> >>> Well, what do you think? >>> >>> ** Crowdmatching to fund public goods ** >>> >>> It's longer and wordier than "free the commons" but is more accurate. It >>> gets right away into our use of 'crowdmatching' and clarifies that it's >>> for fundraising, and uses "public goods" correctly. I'd think a reader >>> would immediately say "what's crowdmatching?" and "what are public >>> goods?" at which point those are indeed *the* two questions we want >>> people to ask and that we want to answer concisely in order to introduce >>> Snowdrift.coop. >> >> I strongly agree. I while ago I suggested "Catalyzing creation of >> public goods" among other ideas for a new tagline. "Catalyzing >> creation..." was definitely too vague, but the term "crowdmatching" >> didn't occur to me until a few months later. I think this new >> combination of "crowdmatching", "fund", and "public goods" is excellent >> and should be a big help in quickly giving people a basic understanding >> of what Snowdrift.coop is about. >> >> > > Some alternatives of the same content: > > Crowdmatching to fund public goods > Crowdmatch funding of public goods > Crowdmatched funding of public goods > Crowdmatch funding for public goods > Crowdmatched funding for public goods > Crowdmatching funding of public goods > Crowdmatching funding for public goods > Crowdmatching funds for public goods > Public goods funding through crowdmatching > Funding public goods through crowdmatching > Crowdmatching funds public goods > > Incidentally, the only shorter one than my initial suggestion is a > stranger grammar to parse because it's a complete sentence instead of > just a verb clause or a noun clause. I think a clause is better than a > sentence. So, it looks like the first suggestion may be best anyway. > > > > > > ___ > Discuss mailing list > Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop > https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss > ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
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 resources, not actually the >> public goods which are technically what we're working with. >> >> I just was chatting with Robert and ended up saying "I don't think we'll >> come up with much better, but the idea we want to express is something >> like 'Crowdmatching to fund public goods'" >> >> Well, what do you think? >> >> ** Crowdmatching to fund public goods ** >> >> It's longer and wordier than "free the commons" but is more accurate. It >> gets right away into our use of 'crowdmatching' and clarifies that it's >> for fundraising, and uses "public goods" correctly. I'd think a reader >> would immediately say "what's crowdmatching?" and "what are public >> goods?" at which point those are indeed *the* two questions we want >> people to ask and that we want to answer concisely in order to introduce >> Snowdrift.coop. > > I strongly agree. I while ago I suggested "Catalyzing creation of > public goods" among other ideas for a new tagline. "Catalyzing > creation..." was definitely too vague, but the term "crowdmatching" > didn't occur to me until a few months later. I think this new > combination of "crowdmatching", "fund", and "public goods" is excellent > and should be a big help in quickly giving people a basic understanding > of what Snowdrift.coop is about. > > Some alternatives of the same content: Crowdmatching to fund public goods Crowdmatch funding of public goods Crowdmatched funding of public goods Crowdmatch funding for public goods Crowdmatched funding for public goods Crowdmatching funding of public goods Crowdmatching funding for public goods Crowdmatching funds for public goods Public goods funding through crowdmatching Funding public goods through crowdmatching Crowdmatching funds public goods Incidentally, the only shorter one than my initial suggestion is a stranger grammar to parse because it's a complete sentence instead of just a verb clause or a noun clause. I think a clause is better than a sentence. So, it looks like the first suggestion may be best anyway. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss
Re: [Snowdrift-discuss] Clearer slogan?
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 technically what we're working with. > > I just was chatting with Robert and ended up saying "I don't think we'll > come up with much better, but the idea we want to express is something > like 'Crowdmatching to fund public goods'" > > Well, what do you think? > > ** Crowdmatching to fund public goods ** > > It's longer and wordier than "free the commons" but is more accurate. It > gets right away into our use of 'crowdmatching' and clarifies that it's > for fundraising, and uses "public goods" correctly. I'd think a reader > would immediately say "what's crowdmatching?" and "what are public > goods?" at which point those are indeed *the* two questions we want > people to ask and that we want to answer concisely in order to introduce > Snowdrift.coop. I strongly agree. I while ago I suggested "Catalyzing creation of public goods" among other ideas for a new tagline. "Catalyzing creation..." was definitely too vague, but the term "crowdmatching" didn't occur to me until a few months later. I think this new combination of "crowdmatching", "fund", and "public goods" is excellent and should be a big help in quickly giving people a basic understanding of what Snowdrift.coop is about. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.snowdrift.coop https://lists.snowdrift.coop/mailman/listinfo/discuss