Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

cc-europe - Re: [CC-Europe] [cc-affiliates] Global Network Weekly #28

cc-europe AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Cc-europe mailing list

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Alek <alek AT creativecommons.pl>
  • To: Jane Park <janepark AT creativecommons.org>, Diane Peters <diane AT creativecommons.org>, Jennie Rose Halperin <jennie AT creativecommons.org>
  • Cc: CC Affiliates <cc-affiliates AT lists.ibiblio.org>, scann <scannopolis AT gmail.com>, CC Europe List <CC-Europe AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [CC-Europe] [cc-affiliates] Global Network Weekly #28
  • Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2017 12:25:32 +0100

+1  to what Scann and Diane wrote.

this is very useful data that we should have access to, and build upon in successive years.

 

Best,

Alek

 

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Diane Peters <diane AT creativecommons.org> wrote:

As someone not deeply involved any longer in the surveys (but love it and miss it!) I recall that Michelle and I used to publish all of the results, along the lines scann is suggesting here. I also think there's a balance to be struck, because we want people to be candid and if we publish everything that might dissuade them from such candidness.

 

Anyway, it's a good problem to have. I'm certain @Simeon is up to the task!

 

Diane


Diane M. Peters

General Counsel, Creative Commons

Portland, Oregon

13:00-21:00 UTC

 

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 8:23 AM, scann <scannopolis AT gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Simeon, since you are mentioning that... one thing that frequently happens is that the surveys are not frequently published. As an example, I can cite the CC Summit survey, the survey that Claudio did regarding "succesful projects" (I think that it was in collaboration with you). Rather than more surveys I think that we need to get to actually know the results of the surveys, in part because they help to kick off processes that otherwise would remain silent. The survey that John Weitzmann did in collaboration with Jessica back in their day (presented at Korea) was a powerful resource to kick off the Steering Committee process, but I don't know to what extent it was made publicly available apart from this list.

 

These are my 2 cents... we need to make surveys more public & share the results.

 

Best,

Scann

 

El 17 nov. 2017 12:51 p. m., "Simeon Oriko" <simeon AT creativecommons.org> escribió:

Hello CC friends! 👋🏽

 

In previous years, Creative Commons has undertaken an Affiliate Survey at about this time of year to generate key statistics and data about our network.

 

Earlier this year, we released the Faces of the Commons Research which was aimed to support the strategic process that led to the new Global Network Strategy.

 

I've spent part of this week thinking about past surveys, its objectives and what a similar process for the future would look like.

 

What information would you like to know about our network? How often? How should we collect or generate it? How should we use it?

 

Any ideas or thoughts, please share them with me.

 

Kind Regards,

 

Simeon Oriko


Simeon Oriko 

Network Manager, Creative Commons

 

Invest in an open future. Support Creative Commons today: http://bit.ly/19IjSKl 

 

_______________________________________________
cc-affiliates mailing list
cc-affiliates AT lists.ibiblio.org
https://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-affiliates


_______________________________________________
cc-affiliates mailing list
cc-affiliates AT lists.ibiblio.org
https://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-affiliates

 


_______________________________________________
cc-affiliates mailing list
cc-affiliates AT lists.ibiblio.org
https://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-affiliates



 

--

Jane Park

Director of Platforms and Partnerships

Creative Commons

@janedaily

 

Invest in the commons: https://donate.creativecommons.org/

_______________________________________________ CC-Europe mailing list CC-Europe AT lists.ibiblio.org https://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/cc-europe




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page