[cc-community] The iCommons Lab Report
Heather Ford
hfordsa at gmail.com
Mon Nov 13 02:28:10 EST 2006
I've moved this discussion over to icommons list - subscribe at
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/icommons.
Best,
Heather.
On 12 Nov 2006, at 1:16 AM, Tom Chance wrote:
> Ahoy,
>
> On Friday 10 November 2006 08:34, Heather Ford wrote:
>> 1. How the Code of Conduct came into being: On the 13th of July,
>> there was a community meeting to discuss iCommons governance. At the
>> meeting, the Community decided to contribute to a statement of
>> values that would govern the community. In the July/August edition of
>> the Lab Report I stated that we would be developing a similar 'Code
>> of conduct' which might be a more practical way of looking at this,
>> since it would govern the way that community members interact with
>> one another in areas where we would collaborate (at the summit, in
>> mailing lists, etc). The iCommons Code of Conduct (http://
>> wiki.icommons.org/index.php/ICommons_Code_of_Conduct) has been here
>> since 30 July and iCommons has always asked for comments and
>> suggestions to its development and design.
>
> I must have missed this decision, can we read a fuller explanation
> of why it
> was made and on what basis the code of conduct was drawn up? It
> looks "fit
> for purpose", as it were, but it falls short of the core values
> statement
> that was discussed in July. For example, one of my main reasons for
> wanting
> the core values statement was to provide a basis for decisions about
> fundraising and purchasing, and the code of conduct is both
> inadequate and
> inappropriate for such a task.
>
>
>
>> - the current community (those on the mailing list, that is) is
>> mostly made up of people from the North - iCommons is currently
>> working very hard to change that structure by applying for grants to
>> build capacity in the South to advance these issues in a truly global
>> fashion. Until then, we do not believe that we can leave it up to the
>> 4/5 most vocal members of the community, all of whom come from the
>> North, to be deciding the future of this global organisation.
>
> That's a good reason to be cautious about handing control to a fairly
> homogenous bunch of people on a mailing list. But it'd be helpful
> if you (the
> board) could explain further the vision of the community that
> iCommons will
> end up being. Who will it include, and at what stage will this
> community
> start to take more control?
>
> It's all very well asking for people to trust you, but so far we've
> been
> offered little reason to, and I know a lot of people are frustrated
> at having
> to wait for a genuine grassroots organisation where we can build and
> organise. We already have one autocratic organisation - CC - which
> goes some
> way towards explaining tempers.
>
> Anyway, caution is one thing, but I think it would be very helpful,
> and
> principled, if the board could be a bit more transparent, and seek
> more input
> from the community. Not everybody can follow the wiki edits to know
> what's
> going on. More at the end of the email...
>
>
>> 2. The iCommons Community Council will not be "voted" into power for
>> the same reasons. We want to achieve a diverse range of individuals
>> who are active in the community. Again, I do not think that the board
>> will have major differences of opinion here. As indicated, the iCCC
>> will act as an advisory board to iCommons. I, personally, hope that
>> the iCCC actually *replaces* the Board in the long run. But as with
>> all young organisations who are yet to grow their member base, we
>> can't move to this stage before some important ground work has been
>> done.
>
> What important ground work? Lots of people here have experience in
> starting up
> grassroots organisations, myself included, so I'd be interested to
> hear a
> fuller explanation of this. I would have thought that gaining the full
> participation of the community, and empowering the grassroots,
> would be the
> best way to gain trust and interest.
>
>
>
>> Above all, it is important to realise that iCommons does not want to
>> become the next UN for the Commons. iCommons is not *just* a platform
>> for discussion and debate - it is a platform for *action*. As such,
>> we are very much about 'running code'. What we're striving for, above
>> all else, is to run that code in a way that the community (both
>> present and potential) believes in.
>
> I'd personally love iCommons to become the UN of the commons,
> because slander
> aside the UN *does* an awful lot. UNICEF saves the lives of
> millions of
> children, UNAIDS rallies reluctant governments to commit aid and
> diplomatic
> muscle, whilst the assembly allows countries a rare chance to
> debate openly.
> Anyway, analogies aside I think we agree that iCommons needs to be
> about
> action and reflection, healthy division and unity.
>
> My vision of iCommons is a grassroots-led organisation that builds
> a movement,
> supplementing the legal/code tools-based hierarchical approach of
> CC with a
> democratic space and organisational muscle.
>
>> But, as always, we're very open to suggestions of how to make this
>> better. Start a discussion on the wiki, write something for the Lab
>> Report, start a node: lets try and build this organisation into
>> something important and relevant rather than shooting it down before
>> we've even started.
>
> Shouting down does suck, but I'd prefer if we could find a way to
> discuss
> things properly. Wikis have their place but they've been pretty
> hopeless so
> far in stimulating and facilitating good discussions.
>
> If we could define what we mean by "the iCommons community" (i.e.
> institute a
> membership scheme with a public register) then claims such as "the
> majority
> of the community are with us" would appear less fraudulent. We
> could all be
> sure that "the community" has indeed properly discussed documents
> such as the
> code of conduct, and that it met no serious resistance; and that "the
> community" is OK with the board acting as a temporary benevolent
> dictator
> until the ground work is completed for a democratic takeover. It
> would also
> help us to guage the level of participation in important
> discussions, and
> better understand what we should be aiming for.
>
> If the board could circulate information about decisions made, with
> proper
> explanations, to this list then we'd have less of the bombshell
> factor when
> proclamations are handed down. I'm confident that the board members
> are all
> committed to being open and helpful; as David alludes to,
> intentions are one
> thing but a lack of clear democratic structure to carry them
> through is quite
> another.
>
> Finally, if we could be assured that the community (once defined)
> will have
> the opportunity to take control completely at the next iSummit
> (i.e. the iCCC
> replaces the board or gains certain ultimate powers), then the
> sense that
> we're investing energy in something we have no control over would be
> mitigated.
>
> Kind regards,
> Tom
>
> --
> The struggle against power is the struggle of memory against
> forgetting
> - Kundera
> _______________________________________________
> cc-community mailing list
> cc-community at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-community
Heather Ford
Executive Director: iCommons
iCommons Summit, Dubrovnik, Croatia: 15-17 June, 2007
Phone: +27 11 327 3155
queenbea878: AOL
243161375: ICQ
heatherford: skype
www.icommons.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-community/attachments/20061113/2367cca7/attachment-0001.htm
More information about the cc-community
mailing list