Leigh, I get your point. And I do agree with you that if you don't facilitate mash-up practices you reduce connections, and therefore the network becomes smaller and restrained... openness is the way... I guess these subtleties are why so much discussion occurs regarding the meaning of open...
I also get your point about items that connect nodes vs. being the nodes themselves. All this said I would think that Lawrence Lessig at one point would have been considered a node evangelizing the benefits of a creative commons, through time the CC has become a part of the conduit. Like flickr, it was at one time a small group hacking together a photo sharing site (there were a group). Linux at one time was an individual project... So could it be that all nodes or conduit technologies start as individuals or small groups... I seek an example where a network just appeared without it first being started by a small group or individual... Cheers, Peter On Nov 3, 12:00 pm, "Leigh Blackall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Interesting Peter, I hadn't considered that list as nodes in a network. I > suppose they are in some ways, but I have always considered them as the > things that connect the real nodes - the platforms that facilitate > communication between nodes. > > Take your K12 project on WikiEd. I see that as a node or nodes, both > embodied in the content, and in you as the personal point of contact. K12 > may someday connect with a similar or complimentary project on Wikispaces.. > with a particular blog post.. a Youtube video.. another individual who works > on her own space, but through certain technologies - feeds into K12... etc. > This same networking of information and people can happen inside a single > platform such as Wikieducator - but I would question its capacities if it > where only inside Wikied. > > Things that make the networked "mission" succeed: Using digital formats > published openly online. Use of CC By to unrestrict reuse and sampling (I > suspect copyright will be a thing of the past in the not too distant future, > if Google's approach to it is anything to go by). > > Trappings that can undo the flexibility of a network: Prescribing certain > practices - such as CC By, Open Format Standards or Open Source Software (as > much as I appreciate their worth, the loss in potential connections is too > great if we insist on these too much). Not facilitating "mashup" practices > (embedding 3rd party media). Centralising services. Policies that police, > and so on. > > On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 7:12 AM, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Leigh, > > Most Excellent. I agree its time for those who have been following > > this thread to watch (or re-watch) the Downes video; > >http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4126240905912531540 > > And I would agree I see a GROUP entrenching itself within WE. Not that > > this is a bad thing, it just is. Though, I do believe a network > > approach will have greater success in meeting the WE mission. WE can > > only hope that the council also sees it this way, or maybe they will > > see having a group approach is best for meeting the challenges of the > > WE mission. I think that encouraging a NETWORK of educators to utilize > > the WE infrastructure, and then everyone (WE Council, Etc...) gets out > > of the way is the best (re: like WIkiSpaces). In relation to the group > > vs. network and the "ills" within a group (control, resources, etc...) > > It makes me wonder if this is how Minhaaj sees profiteering? > > > A few question that come from all this; Can a resource node on the > > network be started by a network? Or have all resource nodes grown out > > of the efforts of an individual or small group? If you look at the > > current set or resource nodes, most of them grew from the efforts of > > an individual or small group. Maybe this is the natural lifecycle of a > > network node. And the challenge for any node is to transition from > > starting as a group, letting go, and becoming a network node... > > > (Examples of resource nodes starting from individuals or small groups > > would be; Skype, OCW, CCK08, Wikipedia, Wikispaces, Delicious, Flickr, > > CC...) So what do you think, do all network nodes start out as small > > groups? > > > As another Canadian, Thank-you...I certainly hope this thread plants > > some seeds and allows this important discussion to become a part of > > the WE consciousness. > > > Sincerely, Peter > > > On Nov 3, 1:06 am, "Leigh Blackall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Peter, I sense you have it. That makes me happy :) > > > > I am just back from a walk in the mountains, and struggle to find the > > > motivation to explain this any more. I'm satisfied that I've at least > > > communicated my thoughts to Peter, and hope he'll carry the ball further. > > I > > > will recommend for a third time to watch Downes video explaining the > > tension > > > between groups and networks, and reflect on the controlling influences > > that > > > groups have on us individually - especially Wikieducator. Sorry if you > > all > > > have watched it - I just see little evidence of it. > > > > Legs so sore I can barely keep the laptop on my lap! Face burnt, mouth > > dry, > > > boots wet. I'll sleep well tonight! > > > > On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 6:18 AM, Derek Chirnside > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > > > > > Well well. Saturday, 6.01am here, just off to the Coast with two > > bands, > > > > one classic rock and one progressive rock to play 7 hours at the Empire > > > > Hotel during the 6,000 people Ross Fireworks Festival, hay fever > > disenhanced > > > > (severely today), and very very tired after the decision this week in > > the > > > > Moodle trial here and the huge amount of work leading up to this. > > > > > Then this post comes. The first words where I think I really can > > engage > > > > wkith this fascinating discussion, possibly at the risk of missing the > > > > point, but I do have some things to say. > > > > I'm based at an unusual institution. They will give us the OK to start > > of > > > > UCTL.canterbury.ac.nz as a little fun thing, to give away all the work > > > > from one of my recent projects, yet quibble over pixel widths on > > learning > > > > pages with branding, and force a 12 month process when 2 weeks would > > really > > > > be enough to make a decision. etc. A place of contradictions where I > > am a > > > > minion. Some things (only some things) are not the best, but I'm > > finding > > > > (vaguely)a place there. > > > > > I'm a dabbler in WE. In and out like a yo yo - committed to OER but > > like > > > > some other software develiopers, mistaking a clear view of the goal > > with the > > > > closeness of it. Some of your comments probably resonate about why I > > find > > > > it hard at times in the WE OER environment. > > > > > BUT: I can't post now more, got to pack trailors etc, and I'll be away > > from > > > > any internet for 36 hours. > > > > The crunch came three weeks ago. I was off to do a reccee for the Ross > > > > trip to the Coast. At 27 hours notice I got a call to run 2 Podcasting > > > > workshops on the coast. I was already going, so hey, I thought, lets > > do it. > > > > Where to put it was my query? WE was obvious. Checked out the > > podcasting > > > > stuff. Tried to decide what to do. Fiddle with it? Copy and adapt > > it? > > > > Work with Podcasting to create Derek's Podcasting. I had no time to do > > it > > > > this way. How to name my pages? How to cluster them? How much to > > > > contextualise? Who owns the page 'podcasting workshop' and can I > > fiddle > > > > with it? Should I start one as well? > > > > > This is a trivial context I know, but they made me face a few of these > > > > questions you are debating here. > > > > > OK. Unfinished. > > > > But I have broken the ice. I'll be back. > > > > If the discussion has not moved on two much I'll post tomorrow > > afternoon. > > > > I may post even if it has. :-) > > > > > -Derek > > > > > 2008/10/31 Alex P. Real <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > Hi Leigh, > > > > >> Beautiful response, I really appreciate it <smile>. The scenario > > > >> product/maintainer/tradeoff is recurrent in many realms, not just > > software. > > > >> I can only agree to your reading on collaborative editing, the main > > reason > > > >> why I've refrained from contributing contents, to see how things work > > and > > > >> avoid potential uneasiness among page creators. I find more > > productive > > > >> adding to something going on than starting from scratch. And as the > > prime > > > >> focus is the Commonwealth it seemed coherent to leave the initiative > > to > > > >> intended beneficiaries, maybe a bias acquired in development projects. > > I > > > >> know I can start my own page, node, but seemed out of place, so > > focused on > > > >> Collage G-group until it fulfilled its role in COL's agenda. No > > criticism, > > > >> right? > > > > >> Re TQF I got involved replying to an email by Anil re content > > development > > > >> and read the full thread with keen interest, same as the Wikipedia > > entry. > > > >> With such a diverse base of educators WE seems ideal to conduct some > > > >> research re existing frameworks, limitations, alternatives, etc. to > > > >> contribute to TQF or whatever and try minimize the dangers you rightly > > > >> perceive, and take into account country/cultural specificities usually > > set > > > >> aside; or as some sort of repository. But again, not for me to tell. > > I'll > > > >> start my own stuff to pursue my interests, otherwise I'll end > > quitting. > > > > >> I can only guess what you mean by "grouped thinking" (my ignorance > > re WE > > > >> subtleties), keep fighting for your beliefs. I may not agree with you > > 100% > > > >> which is healthy and enriching, but it doesn't mean I don't > > > >> follow/like/admire what you do. > > > > >> Cheers, > > > > >> Alex > > > > >> *De:* [email protected] [mailto: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >> *En nombre de *Leigh Blackall > > > >> *Enviado el:* jueves, 30 de octubre de 2008 22:46 > > > >> *Para:* [email protected] > > > >> *Asunto:* [WikiEducator] Re: !!RE: [WikiEducator] Re: Another > > Milestone > > > > >> Alex said: > > > > >> Sorry if pushy here but have you > > > >> considered your approach could be perceived as an imposition itself? > > > >> Criticism is great, and I mean it, but what alternatives do you > > suggest? > > > >> Ever thought TQF could ease many lives, e.g. qual recognition abroad, > > > >> which > > > >> can be a real nightmare? > > > > >> Yes, of course Alex, I have and do consider the question - often > > > >> reflecting on the many years I have spent encouraging (to put it > > lightly) > > > >> teachers to use socially networked media, and arguing for a specific > > type of > > > >> change, namely individual capability and independence, and networked > > > >> practice. The question I ask myself is how much my methods align with > > > >> individuality, and undermine those > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WikiEducator" group. To visit wikieducator: http://www.wikieducator.org To visit the discussion forum: http://groups.google.com/group/wikieducator To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
