Widgets, Folksonomies, Mashups and Syndication

[Paul Schumann]

This is a place to ask and answer questions about the Introduction to Web 2.0 Webinar

[Paul Schumann]

Stephanie K Nestlerode : so what will be the balancing element for grounding us?
Glenna Gerard : good question...how do we ground the virtual environment?
Glenna Gerard : how do we develop the neurological and psychological bandwidth to ground and work with the amazing amount of input?
Chuck Ragland : As with virtual storage computer systems, I'm reaching my personal "thrashhold" where my brain & mind are spending more time & energy paging stuff in & out than accoomoplishing anything.
Stephanie K Nestlerode : my concern exactly!
Patrick M. : on particularly interesting point of the many/mass:many:mass is that it's not mass spamming of information, it's published and masses can subscribe to them (i.e. via RSS), &c. so the receipt of data is implicitly acceptable

[Paul Schumann]

Stephanie K Nestlerode : how can web 2.0 inform collaboration 2.0 within government organizations and their clients? that's the quest I'm on with clients
Glenna Gerard : maybe we need a creativity web 2.0 session on that inquiry?
marge schiller : my field is appreciative inquiry I wonder if the identification of issue rather than problem expands the creativity?
Stephanie K Nestlerode : absolutely, Marge .... I remember you from the AI world
Glenna Gerard : yes yes...i was just thinking the same thing...identifying what's working as well and researching that.
marge schiller : I'm in for that one!

[Paul Schumann]

Ellen Domb : I'd like a lot more exploration of how you form the affinity group, with people trusting each other, via web. I've been successful using web where the people already know each other and have that trust.

[Paul Schumann]

There's a lot of information about this field of inquiry in this web site. Just search it with the phrase "innovation commons".

Paul Schumann said:

Ellen Domb : I'd like a lot more exploration of how you form the affinity group, with people trusting each other, via web. I've been successful using web where the people already know each other and have that trust.

[Paul Schumann]

This is not a complete answer, but it may be a start: http://www.glocalvantage.com/timespace.mp3

Paul Schumann said:

Stephanie K Nestlerode : so what will be the balancing element for grounding us?
Glenna Gerard : good question...how do we ground the virtual environment?
Glenna Gerard : how do we develop the neurological and psychological bandwidth to ground and work with the amazing amount of input?
Chuck Ragland : As with virtual storage computer systems, I'm reaching my personal "thrashhold" where my brain & mind are spending more time & energy paging stuff in & out than accoomoplishing anything.
Stephanie K Nestlerode : my concern exactly!
Patrick M. : on particularly interesting point of the many/mass:many:mass is that it's not mass spamming of information, it's published and masses can subscribe to them (i.e. via RSS), &c. so the receipt of data is implicitly acceptable

[Paul Schumann]

I'd be willing to work with a group on this.

Paul Schumann said:

Stephanie K Nestlerode : how can web 2.0 inform collaboration 2.0 within government organizations and their clients? that's the quest I'm on with clients
Glenna Gerard : maybe we need a creativity web 2.0 session on that inquiry?
marge schiller : my field is appreciative inquiry I wonder if the identification of issue rather than problem expands the creativity?
Stephanie K Nestlerode : absolutely, Marge .... I remember you from the AI world
Glenna Gerard : yes yes...i was just thinking the same thing...identifying what's working as well and researching that.
marge schiller : I'm in for that one!

[Ellen Domb]

Need some handholding on how to do the search, limiting it to just this website. Help?

Paul Schumann said:

There's a lot of information about this field of inquiry in this web site. Just search it with the phrase "innovation commons".

Paul Schumann said:

Ellen Domb : I'd like a lot more exploration of how you form the affinity group, with people trusting each other, via web. I've been successful using web where the people already know each other and have that trust.

[Ellen Domb]

OK, I found the search box AND I found Paul's recorded webcast. I agree that intellectual commons of all kinds (not just innovation) are both useful and possible, and they are based on human desire for community and intrinsic rewards (feeling good about participating in a community, etc. This is why we like to sing in groups and play music in orchestras, etc.) rather than extrinsic rewards (payment for intellectual property, etc.) I had a very successful experience with the TRIZ Journal, www.triz-journal.com which has most of the element listed in Paul's presentations--participation by competitors was the hardest one to master--but I've also seen lots of attempts to create communities of learning, communities of innovation, etc. fall apart. I'm not a full-fledged egalitarian! I do think that there are people who know more than I do, and want to know how to persuade them to participate in a commons, where they might have to do a lot of giving before they get anything that they consider valuable.

Ellen Domb said:

Need some handholding on how to do the search, limiting it to just this website. Help?

Paul Schumann said:

There's a lot of information about this field of inquiry in this web site. Just search it with the phrase "innovation commons".

Paul Schumann said:

Ellen Domb : I'd like a lot more exploration of how you form the affinity group, with people trusting each other, via web. I've been successful using web where the people already know each other and have that trust.

[Ellen Domb]

I've seen some discussion that people fall into one of 2 basic types: people who believe in abundance and people who believe in scarcity. The "abundance" types are willing to share, because they believe that there is enough, and everybody will be enriched by sharing. The "scarcity" types want to hold onto what they've got, and get more, and don't trust that the universe has enough, so they want to protect theirs. My experience in failed commons ventures is that "scarcity" type people don't want to be in, don't participate, etc. Whether they remove themselves OR are pushed out by the norms of the commons doesn't really matter, they are out. And the commons loses what they could have contributed.
Do people fall into these categories throught nature? Nurture? Can an adult be migrated from one category to another?

[Paul Schumann]

Wow! What an interesting and complex question. Let me think about how to answer it without having to write too much.

Ellen Domb said:

I've seen some discussion that people fall into one of 2 basic types: people who believe in abundance and people who believe in scarcity. The "abundance" types are willing to share, because they believe that there is enough, and everybody will be enriched by sharing. The "scarcity" types want to hold onto what they've got, and get more, and don't trust that the universe has enough, so they want to protect theirs. My experience in failed commons ventures is that "scarcity" type people don't want to be in, don't participate, etc. Whether they remove themselves OR are pushed out by the norms of the commons doesn't really matter, they are out. And the commons loses what they could have contributed.
Do people fall into these categories throught nature? Nurture? Can an adult be migrated from one category to another?

[Paul Schumann]

It's interesting to think that with the web 2.0 tools that I am not the smartest person in the room.

Ellen Domb said:

OK, I found the search box AND I found Paul's recorded webcast. I agree that intellectual commons of all kinds (not just innovation) are both useful and possible, and they are based on human desire for community and intrinsic rewards (feeling good about participating in a community, etc. This is why we like to sing in groups and play music in orchestras, etc.) rather than extrinsic rewards (payment for intellectual property, etc.) I had a very successful experience with the TRIZ Journal, www.triz-journal.com which has most of the element listed in Paul's presentations--participation by competitors was the hardest one to master--but I've also seen lots of attempts to create communities of learning, communities of innovation, etc. fall apart. I'm not a full-fledged egalitarian! I do think that there are people who know more than I do, and want to know how to persuade them to participate in a commons, where they might have to do a lot of giving before they get anything that they consider valuable.

Ellen Domb said:

Need some handholding on how to do the search, limiting it to just this website. Help?

Paul Schumann said:

There's a lot of information about this field of inquiry in this web site. Just search it with the phrase "innovation commons".

Paul Schumann said:

Ellen Domb : I'd like a lot more exploration of how you form the affinity group, with people trusting each other, via web. I've been successful using web where the people already know each other and have that trust.