Message 00606 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00565 Message: 31/38 L20 [In date index] [In thread index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [jox] Debrief and clarification process

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
hmm... it seems weird that this was settled so quickly.

two things:

1) i think it is ok to have publishing drafts as the default option.
however, i don't like the idea of asking people who opt out to provide a
rationale. this kind of goes against the whole point of opting out.

2) @mathieu - although it's a response to amy's concerns, the line you
incorporated in the review process section about not being harsh when
submitting draft look a bit out of place. it's too idiosyncratic in relation
to the other material. amy does however raise an interesting and important
point, which invites us to think about what making things visible means and
about how we might need to highlight certain things with contributors. maybe
we should make a 'things to consider before submitting your draft' list that
covers these kinds of things. i'm sure more will emerge as we go.


Nate Tkacz

School of Culture and Communication
University of Melbourne


Research Page:

Current project:

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 1:20 AM, Stefan Merten <smerten> wrote:

Hi all!

24 minutes ago Alex Halavais wrote:
My concern with making it optional is that most people won't. The
default is to do what you are familiar and comfortable with. I'll
admit that despite my push for making this the requirement, I myself
would--if given the option--be unlikely to open my draft up. I'd still
publish it on my site or something, probably, but why would I take a
risk when others will not.

I think it's a cultural question. The same goes for software: Not
every software is written well and of high quality. It may work but
for some pieces if you look at the sources...

Still today in Free Software there is a culture of publishing
everything - good or bad. That culture needs encouraging. For Free
Software it's mandatory. And people with bad software also risk their
next job - still it's published. Though there are certainly
differences may be we can learn from this example.



[2 text/html]

Thread: joxT00565 Message: 31/38 L20 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00606 [Homepage] [Navigation]