wiki sites

[Michael Herman]

hello birgitt...


Birgitt Williams wrote:

> Michael (Herman),
>
> I apologize for taking so long to continue this conversation with you.
> Life happened and today is my first real computer day in weeks.
>
>
>

...this is exactly why i want to have this conversation, to do this
work, inside of the wiki space on the website rather than via the
oslist.  the work we are doing now in the .NET wiki, me and the others
who've already joined in, is large and longterm.  it's not the kind of
thing we can do with occasional oslist postings...  we need a place to
gather and grow our ongoing plans and reflections, where gaps in
attendance don't create gaps in the work.  also, no one person actually
controls those sites and we need to be watching what happens there so
that no vandals or technical troubles do serious damage to them.   some
of us are visiting this new space daily to notice and extend what is
there.  this is the nature of this ongoing development work.  it takes
regular attention and attendance, a continuity that gets lost in the
world of email...

> I wanted to draft a thorough response regarding the conversation that
> we had about the new www.openspaceworld.net
> <http://www.openspaceworld.net> site.
>

your thoroughness and depth of attention would add much to the site, if
you would just add to the site... <grin>


> I notice that you have posted our OS list conversation on that site.
> For now, I feel that the right place for my posting is on the OS list
> because it involves our OS list community--and I am fine if you also
> post it on the website in your questions section.
>
> I admire all that you are doing with the websites, your energy and
> passion, commitment and discipline. I wanted to be very clear about
> that so that you will hopefully see that where I am coming from is a
> supportive place. I note your invitations for us to participate in the
> websites and I would like to do this but first I seek clarity about
> whether it is the right place for me to commit some of my energy. This
> e-mail is about seeking that clarity and I will be pleased to have the
> discussion that helps me to decide.
>
>
>
...and i thnk that the only way to decide if you will participate in the
work that is unfolding at .NET is to go there... there is no discussion
to be had here... the space at .NET is open.  you are welcome there.  it
is not a conversation, really, there either.  it is the development of a
working space for practitioners. an unfolding project plan.  i think you
don't like this word, practitioner, but i don't know what else to call
people who are practicing ost.  perhaps you prefer 'leaders of open
space events and projects.'

in any event, the .NET space is a facility for those who are practicing,
leading, opening to post the proceedings from their events there.  it is
a space that community groups and project teams can use to work on their
own, local projects.  it's a space where those groups can benefit from a
free, open and simple online workign space AND where we all can benefit
from watching them unfold their work in an ongoing open space way.  this
space is obviously not appropriate for every group or leader.  it is
also likely that not all groups will unfold in perfectly beautiful ways.
 what does happen there will be real, and that should be enough to be
interesting.

one of the project groups hosted there in the .NET space is the work of
maintaining that .NET space.   it is in that space that we are working
out how .NET works.   it is a work in progress and only those who show
up there to do the work are going to be able to shape that work.
anybody who cares about what our online spaces look like needs to show
up there and *work with* other people there to give it shape.   the
proceedings of any open space session are written by those who actually
attend the session.  in this case, the session in meeting in the .NET
wiki.  http://www.openspaceworld.net/wiki.cgi?


> I also choose to recognize that by being the webmaster for the
> community Open Space websites, that you are in a position of power.
> From that position, by shaping the "givens" or what is not negotiable,
> you have great power in shaping how Open Space Technology is perceived
> in the world now and into the future. This is neither good nor bad. It
> simply is power of position added to the power that we all have
> including power of presence and power of communication. I believe that
> you will hold and carry out this power of position well, with
> recognition that many people rely on the reputation of OST for their
> ongoing business as independent consultants who have focused their
> business on OST.
>
>
>
> I know that our participants in OST meetings go through the same
> thing. They receive an invitation and then they have to make a
> decision about whether they choose to attend or not. Offering as much
> information in the invitation as possible is helpful so that they can
> make an informed choice. And so, I was seeking more information about
> what I was being invited into. I am not wanting to interupt your
> opening circle, but wanting to go back to what this is and what it is
> not so that I can make an informed choice.
>
>
>

...yes, i am the keeper of the .ORG and .NET websites.  at least
technically, that is.  but these sites have always run in open space.
 from the beginning, i have actively invited everyone to take
responsibility for the site and the story.  i have perhaps taken most
direct responsibility and so i have perhaps had more of what i care
about reflected in the site, which is to say that the power i have has
come through my own practice of passion bounded by responsiblity.   but
many other names are there with mine, because many others have posted
their own articles, tools, stories and other bits into the old bulletin
board and/or the new wiki spaces, in response to my invitations.   and
everyone gets full credit for what they have contributed.

to the extent that there are some pages at .ORG that say what open space
*is* then yes, these pages do something to shape that story in the
world.  that so many people commented on these pages when they were
first posted in 1999 (i think), that so many are using these few pages
around the world as handouts to clients, and that members of the oslist
have chosen to take responsibility for translating them into a dozen
languages tells me that they fairly well reflect what we as a worldwide
practice community believe OST to be in the world.

the invitation to .ORG has been and continues to be this:  come post
your stories, your contact info, your tools, your links, your training
info, etc.  so that people everywhere can find you and your OST wisdom.
 we give you space and access to the world with full credit and
attribution and contact potential and you give us the use of your wisdom.

the invitation to .NET has been and continues to be this:  come and use
the space to support your project/community work in OST.  post your
notes and followup plans and then keep working them out there, with your
local partners and participants there for as long as it's useful to you.
 we'll give you the space to work, you give us the chance to watch you work.

within the .NET space, i have begun to document the development of the
.ORG space, as one of the projects unfolding in the .NET wiki.  i like
to think that this is me leading by example, using our online workspace
to convene my own workgroup, on an issue that i am passionate about, the
maintenance and development of the OSW websites.

it is not a small project and not a small responsibility, i think, this
ongoing tidying of a space with so many voices and stories accumulated
now.   it is a project that i think is too big for the oslist... because
many on the list do not care to be involved in it, do not have the time
or interest in getting to understand the structure and histories of the
website stories, are not willing to learn how to edit and organize
information in a wiki website, and/or do not have the time or
inclination to take direct hands-on responsibility for posting things on
the site.

i also think that, while it may be interesting to discuss the content
and structure of the websites on the list, to invite discussion about
the websites in a forum where many participants are not taking direct
responsibility for the work of the sites is not consistent with our
practice of keeping passion and responsibility closely linked, is not
really fair to the many who've worked on the site over the years, and
not particularly helpful to us in moving forward.

i very much want questions and comments about the site, i've always
invited and encouraged and responded to same.    i've dealt with them
directly in the past, in private emails and these have done much to
shape the sites.  what i want to do now is take that community
conversatoin public, make in accessible to the whole community, AND
still continue to invite people to take direct responsibility for their
website passions.  i have not much interest in talking about the sites
with those not willing or able to be directly involved with the
community of folks who are personally and collectively learning their
way into this piece of online work.  it's just too hard for me to do
this in any way other than passion bounded by responsibility.

and so i don't feel particularly powerful in this position at all, i
actually am feeling quite overwhelmed by the amount of attention that
i'm bringing to the various inquiries and learnings and experiments that
are happening now, IN the wikis that have been set up AND at the same
time i am very happy for the company and care that many have and are now
bringing to this work.  i think we are making an important expansion of
community capacity that will be well worth the current stretching for me
personally.

i'm glad for you and anyone else to join us, but for better or worse, we
are gathering at the .NET wiki, not the oslist.  what is being done on
the wiki sites is NOT a substitute for the OSLIST.  i would suggest that
the oslist is our big news circle and that the wiki is a place to
document smaller breakout sessions being held around the world.  whoever
comes to our little breakout session is very welcome and is the right
people.

in any openspace event, we get only the topic and the name(s) of
conveners, no givens, no speeches.... it's up to every participant to
surf by the sessions they think they are interested in and see what is
happening, see if it calls them, see if they want to join that
particular piece fo work.  law of two feet.  or in this case two clicks.
  everybody's welcome to join us and nobody has to.   and the work will
continue to be shaped by those who do join us.



> There are always "givens" or non-negotiables in life, whether we like
> them or not. Collectives of individuals (organizations) run into real
> problems when the "givens" are implicit rather than explicit. This
> leads to the making of assumptions that are not useful. And implicit
> assumptions, in my experience, lead to the potential for misuse of and
> misunderstanding of power. This happened to me within the
> www.openspaceworld.org <http://www.openspaceworld.org> site which I
> brought to your attention. The pages that are "read only" shape the
> tone/philosophy of the site and how it presents OST to the world.
>

...some .ORG pages are read only because they are too big to be edited
directly by any one person.  some of them hold together the structure
that makes it possible to access LOTS of information by relatively
simple and direct paths.  the implicit assumption you seem to be making
is that I wrote them and invited you to come edit MY writing.  i think
that this assumption is not quite right.

as i've said above and before, the site is the authorship of many.  it's
just not appropriate to go in and edit that.  it's also not right to
leave the site totally open so that any individual can push their way to
the front of years of collaboration and development and story-sifting.
that is why i want to grow a development workgroup.   when a workgroup
is established and stabilized, then more of the pages can be opened for
comment, because the group will be able to monitor and secure the
content, balance and maintain access, simplicity clarity, completeness.
 in the absence of community solution and security, technical solution
must suffice, for now at least.  what's more, "not-read-only" is REALLY
open and i just don't have the time and energy to be the only one
defending these pages against vandalism and also to be constantly on
call and on the spot to explain why these pages got to be this way.  in
short, there is much community history in these pages and i'm feeling
some responsibility for passing on that history in an organized,
explicit, and deep community way.

when we first opened up the whole of the .ORG site for editing, .NET did
not yet exist.  now that it does, i have shifted my attention to growing
that and the workgroup there, so that group can eventually  take full
and shared responsibility for unfolding the .ORG site.  that said, .ORG
is by NO means a closed space.

there is, plenty of space at .ORG to post story blurbs, contact info,
resource tools, articles, links etc.... it's the easiest way to join the
work there... just play enough to get your name in teh directory, to
post a story or whatever... it's a way to be involved and mentioned and
contributing without taking on more responsibility.  another implicit
assumption seems to be that i am in control of the websites, and i think
that's just not the case.  if that were true, we would not have 12
languages there and i wouldn't be spending as much time on the whole
project as i am.  it's really more than i care to deal with.  when you
show up and want to edit some of these core pages, i want to know who
will edit the other eleven.  i'm not controlling the content of the site
and also not inviting individuals to unilaterally edit community work.

these questions you're asking here have been helpful in making this
clear.  i am grateful and thank you for that.  i'm sorry if my previous
messages didn't make this community bit clear.  i'm also wishing that
these questions were originally posted into (and now being answered in)
the .NET wiki, where they'd be part of the permanent community record.
 i don't htink i have energy to put them there just now.  over the
years, as people have stepped up to do things (ask questions, post
languages, etc.), i have stepped up to help them.  now i'm really
wanting to use the wiki spaces to do that asking, shaping and helping
more openly, answering questions only once and making it clearer to
everyone where our growing expertise lives, in many bodies and email
boxes other than mine.

>
>
> When you invited us to contribute into that site as a wiki site, it
> appeared that ALL was open to editing and change. And then I ran right
> into the "givens" that were implied but never clearly stated, because
> the very pages I wanted to put changes on where the ones that were
> "read only". You replied saying that this was what gave the site its
> structure and so it could not be changed except through you. In this
> circle of people that we are, there are 360 degrees of perspectives of
> what OST is and how to present it. It is no surprise that my
> perspective is different than yours. Both are valid. However, one
> perspective (may be shared by many) is created for the site by
> structuring the implicit "givens" on that site. I think if it was the
> site of one individual rather than the community site, this would be
> fine. But, with a community site (assuming the community is the
> community on the OS list),
>
> I would say that the "givens" should have a chance for conversation
> and agreement so that the site is truly representative of the
> community. Maybe you did  initiate this discussion to let us help in
> shaping the givens and I missed it. If so, I apologize for raising this.
>

so i hope this clarifies that the sites are indeed 'community' affairs,
community assets and community products, and that the 'community' that
is invited to comment on them is the community that actually shows up to
take responsibility for building and maintaining those spaces, not just
commenting via the OSLIST.   the invitation is primarily to add to this
body of community work, not try to  edit what the community has produced
so far.  anyone can contribute their stories, articles, contact info,
tools, etc... and anyone can join the group  that is beginning to learn
how to give all of that information primary shape and clear
accessibility on the wiki.


>
>
> So now to the www.openspaceworld.net <http://www.openspaceworld.net>
> site. I want to participate if it is a place that is in alignment with
> my energy and I want to support your work. A question for me is, is my
> perspective about OST and how to work with OST welcome on the site?
>
.NET is not really for talking about OST... it's for using it, doing it,
showing it.  so i don't think our perspectives about ost are going to
matter so much.  if you have groups working in os that want to work
online after the event, then you can offer them that online working
space, same as any other.  to the extent that you stay involved iwth
them or even if you can do prep work with them online, we will all learn
something aobut how you practice.  that will be a great gift to all of
us, i thnk.


> Another question for me is will I accept the invitation to
> participating in the site, when there is something in the invitation
> that is philisophically different to what I believe in and different
> to the message I want to give to the world about my work with OST.
> This took me to asking you why the site focuses on OST
> "practitioners". In using this on the splash page, there is already a
> philisophical shaping, an implicit "given". I in no way want to
> challenge your (or others) personal use of that word for your own
> business. My challenge arises when this is an implicit given on the
> community site. I personally do not want to be viewed by my clients as
> someone who is practicing OST. And so, my question arose for you about
> the "givens" for the site. Who has set them, what are they, and can
> they be changed? I know that there are thousands of people in the
> world involved with OST and only about 300 on this list but the list
> is what we have as what can be perceived as a community. I recommend
> that the "givens" for the community Open Space Websites be discussed
> and decided on on this list. I appreciate your invitation to sort out
> the "givens" within the wiki site, but that does not seem to be the
> place to sort out the overarching givens that govern the whole site
> (those that are already in place).
>

i've discussed this some on the .NET wiki.  the site is for
practitioners and the projects they will do there and the people they
will invite to work on those projects in that space... i know we have
some differences in our approaches and languages, but i'm not clear if
you object to the word practitioner everywhere or just on the splash
page.  as i say, i need to take up these questions within the space that
has been opened for them where the real work can get done, rather than
out in the lobby where many might be lured to offer some passion without
taking equivalent responsibility...  so i'm glad to have this continue,
but let's go inside and post something on the wall, so that those who
share our passion for this story can join us and go into this more
deeply, and the larger connections that happen on the list can continue
as well.  we can always bring news of our progress back to this larger
circle and invite others to come into the wiki for a second, third,
fourth... session.

i hope this helps and hope that it will continue to unfold at
http://www.openspaceworld.NET/network/wiki.cgi?OpenSpaceWorldNET


>
>
> I think this is such important work that you are leading in Michael,
> and I see the power in it to deeply affect all who are working with
> OST now and into the future. I thank you and I hope that you find my
> contribution here to be helpful.
>
>
>

many thanks, michael



--

Michael Herman
Michael Herman Associates
300 West North Avenue #1105
Chicago IL 60610 USA
(312) 280-7838

http://www.michaelherman.com - consulting & publications
http://www.globalchicago.net - laboratory & playground
http://www.openspaceworld.org - worldwide open space

...inviting organization into movement




*
*
==========================================================
OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
------------------------------
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change your options,
view the archives of oslist at listserv.boisestate.edu,
Visit:

http://listserv.boisestate.edu/archives/oslist.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openspacetech.org/pipermail/oslist-openspacetech.org/attachments/20030727/415b7e62/attachment-0016.htm>