Loomio
Wed 11 Oct 2017

Journal/blog of social coop

LS
Leo Sammallahti Public Seen by 579

In todays meeting we discussed having a journal/blog to document our experience. Because writing content to the blog takes effort, so we could use toots in the Mastodon instant as content. Here's 3 examples of how we could use toots as material to be posted for blog posts:

The top 5/10/20 most tooted/favourited toots of the day/week/month
- Can we easily check on what toots have had most retoots/favourites/replies?
- How to pick the toot? If someone posts on monday and other one on sunday, and the one on monday has 1 retoot more, who to pick? There should be some objective measurement in my opinion.

Interviews in social coop Mastodon instant
- Interviewing a founding member of a newly established platform cooperative, a candidate for an ongoing coop/credit union/building society election, researcher on coops, etc.
- This would also give us a way to invite people to social coop: approach a person who has just set up a new platform coop and ask that person to join social coop for an interview in our Mastodon instant that will be published in our blog.

Discussions and debates in Mastodon
- Could we organize a discussion or a debate between libertarian and socialist coop enthusiast? Or between anarchist and social democrat? People who both support cooperatives but from a different, sometimes even opposing, political leanings. This might also drive home point the point that we are welcoming to people from different political leanings.

What do you think? I could imagine that people who visit social coop once every two weeks might like to catch up on highlights of the discussion that there has been.

Should we have a blog or a journal of some sort? If so, how do we choose the content?

LS

Leo Sammallahti Wed 11 Oct 2017

One wild idea I just had: An account for social coop on Steemit, and all the money it gets from upvotes goes to social coop? Haven't thought this very far and don't have experience of Steemit. Could be interesting combination of fundraising and doing outreach and promotion.

FHM

Fabián Heredia Montiel Thu 12 Oct 2017

The top 5/10/20 most tooted/favourited toots of the day/week/month

Yes, with the AmbassadorBot :3 (Some examples there)
https://github.com/mbilokonsky/ambassador/

FHM

Fabián Heredia Montiel Thu 12 Oct 2017

Could we organize a discussion or a debate between libertarian and socialist coop enthusiast? Or between anarchist and social democrat? People who both support cooperatives but from a different, sometimes even opposing, political leanings. This might also drive home point the point that we are welcoming to people from different political leanings.

Maybe do a survey first to see the current postures and make a collective fair exposition of each and their connection to cooperatives?

JB

Jake Beamish Fri 15 Jun 2018

ooh I would like to see how the variety looks plotted on https://www.politicalcompass.org/

M

mike_hales Sat 16 Jun 2018

@jakebeamish . . Rich Bartlett @richarddbartlett had a thought-provoking comment in this general area of 'politics', over in Loomio Community, discussing transparency over finances in a coop environment:

With Loomio you have 10 co-op members, plus many other stakeholders. It takes serious energy to agree internally on our shared understanding, and then a tonne more energy to communicate that externally in a way that makes sense to our very different stakeholders. I mean, some of our closest partners are anticapitalist activists, and some of them are capitalists experimenting with philanthropy. It’s super difficult to broadcast messages across that diversity of people in a way that they’re likely to all understand. It’s very easy to create distractions as we use some words that trigger people’s anxieties, e.g. activists anxious that we’ve lost our values, or investors anxious that we’re not a sustainable business.

Check out the whole comment? Thoughtful chap, Rich.

JB

Jake Beamish Sat 16 Jun 2018

interesting stuff – thank you for the link. The cocktail of shame bit hit home especially, ha. I spose this:

It's very easy to create distractions as we use some words that trigger people's anxieties, e.g. activists anxious that we've lost our values, or investors anxious that we're not a sustainable business.

gets complicated because here the activist is a (potential?) member and so is the investor.

Rather than striving to communicate a single coherent message that is universally understood, it could be worth trying to show those internal disagreements openly (unless inappropriate) in the name of transparency and as an invitation to join the debate/instance.

MC

Matthew Cropp Fri 13 Oct 2017

One thing we did a handful of times very early on was organize a synchronous "toot-up" where we'd pick a topic of discussion and discuss it in an agreed upon hour. The last time we did that was #buytwitter, I think, so reviving that practice might be a way of facilitating the debates.

We could even do the same sort of rotation system we're trying out for the calls, where people can sign up to host discussions on a particular topic.

LS

Leo Sammallahti Fri 13 Oct 2017

Brilliant. We could try this out next week?

FHM

Fabián Heredia Montiel started a proposal Fri 13 Oct 2017

Enable an Ambassador Bot (@Ambassador) Closed Sun 22 Oct 2017

Agree - 9
Abstain - 2
Disagree - 0
Block - 0
7 people have voted (21%)
MK

Michele Kipiel
Agree
Sun 15 Oct 2017

Let's give it a try and see how it performs

TB

Thomas Beckett
Agree
Tue 17 Oct 2017

How does it select toots to boost?

FHM

Fabián Heredia Montiel Tue 17 Oct 2017

@thomasbeckett

30 day rolling average of favs of toots with at least 1 fav, any toot over that gets a boost.

Ninja edit: open to other selection proposals of course.

MK

Michele Kipiel Fri 27 Oct 2017

Where are we with this?

FHM

Fabián Heredia Montiel Sat 28 Oct 2017

No idea, @mayel and @victormatekole are the two people I know that are on the Tech side but they might be a bit busy with the bugs/issues of Mastodon 2.0. Maybe create a thread over the Tech / Infrastructure WG?

M

mike_hales Wed 13 Jun 2018

@leosammallahti glad to discover this thread (just discovering this Loomio group). I note the thread has been asleep for 8 months. But I'd say the topic is of ongoing importance. And that all three modes referred to in your context are helpful ways of forming and sustaining a community. Notably, interview and debate. But published also in blog (when it arrives) or wiki, not just live in Mastodon.

This may not be the place to comment this (fork it if you like) . . . as a person discovering social.coop I still can't see any place to get a picture of the whole venture . . . purposes, persons, projects, media spaces. The wiki certainly doesn't do this - it's a bland, unhelpful front-page. @mattnoyes Prezi map may be going to a more public location? But currently the link is buried deep inside the Loomio space. And the Prezi is far from self-explanatory. The portal at OpenCollective only identifies Mastodon as a way in - and I'm the kind of person who would much prefer a static page/site/map rather than a flow of chat, as an entry point/ongoing reference point, to an organisation/community/project.

. . all that slash slash stuff is an indicator that, after 10 days, I still wouldn't know how to describe social.Coop.

Have I somehow missed the front door, welcome message and master map? My browser (duckduckgo) doesn't come up with any hits in the first twenty that are more helpful..

RB

Robert Benjamin Wed 13 Jun 2018

@muninn @mikeh8 So one of the goals of getting a Community Ops Team up and going (besides handling on boarding and CoC issues) was to provide the educational framework for new users. It doesn't exist beyond what the early "founders"/members of SC were able to do. The official resolution to establish/provide scope of the Community Ops team hasn't happened yet but anyone interested should going the Community Working Group to contribute to that.

M

mike_hales Thu 14 Jun 2018

Thanks @robertbenjamin for your pointer to the Community Working Group. I do have a feeling to contribute to a clearer structuring of info regarding the coop, its working structure, current projects, architecture of component systems, governance, responsible individuals, mission, etc. @muninn and I both are having trouble seeing the wood for the trees.

However, Community Working Group seems to be about administrative and regulatory mechanics (including important things like inclusiveness). My sense is that the group called Editorial would be more appropriate for the work that I think needs doing. And that group has zero content, not even a description.Does anybody agree that the necessary work is 'editorial'?

Please anyone, where do I turn? A group with no convenor and no description? A group that I think is not the right one? If there was even a list somewhere, of 'officers' of social.coop, I could contact one or other of you. But there doesn't seem to be.Have I missed it?

Shall I join the Editorial group and open a thread on Describing the social.coop structure, processes and purposes? Does that make me a default group convenor? How do things get done around here - do I need to be approved or anything? Maybe there's a rulebook?

M

mike_hales Thu 14 Jun 2018

@robertbenjamin I don't see this as 'education of new members'. I think it's simply the clear presentation that any organisation should be making of itself to the world: what it does, how it works, what it's for. In that sense, it's basic 'editorial' work that I think needs doing. 'Education' sits a level down from that I feel, at the level of skills or more detailed procedural signposting?

DU

[deactivated account] Fri 15 Jun 2018

I feel the same way, Mike, about there not being clarity around info and seeing the wood for the trees. I think some of this and the questions you have about whom to contact around working in the Editorial group space, may be related to the governance structure still being worked out. I don't think there is clarity on all that yet, though I may be wrong. I joined this instance relatively recently and am not sure! But that's my sense at the moment.

I think what you want to start doing around making more information available in a clearer fashion sounds excellent, and I'd be happy to help.

I wonder if starting a new thread here in the social.coop general space, asking about what the editorial group was meant to be and why it's empty, and whether this effort would fit, might work? Your comments are good ones but are currently in another thread that others might not be paying as much attention to as they might in a new thread with a title devoted specifically to the question about the editorial group.

Just a thought; honestly I don't know how else to address your really important questions!

M

mike_hales Fri 15 Jun 2018

Describing the wood and the trees

Thanks @christinahendricks for suggesting a more prominent post. I'll hang in here a little longer. I'd rather open a working thread in 'the right place' than raise an enquiry thread to clutter the main group space.

I appreciate that governance forms are still work in progress, and working groups are still shaking down. However there's a substantial and complex collective practice here, which ought to be described clearly and explicitly, in Loomio and in the wiki, to enable more effective participation and recruitment. So, some guidance is wanted please, on which group to start this 'describing' work in, from folks such as @robertbenjamin @michelekipiel @matthewcropp @samtoland @mattnoyes @leosammallahti. My opening comment on this is here.

RB

Robert Benjamin Fri 15 Jun 2018

As I believe there are no clear guidelines exist (neither in the Bylaws, polices emanating from a Working Group, or passed proposals) for creating what you are after (distillation/documentation of what Social.Coop is all about suitable for external communication) utilizing the Editorial Working Group for such activity seems like the right place.

A starting point would be to go through what already exists (most of it created in the early days) and bring it all together to see what needs to be added, edited, or refined. Here are all the places where I've seen some for of editorial content around social.coop.

Keeping in mind that some of this is a moving target as there are major policy and procedures "improvements" (CoC, Budgeting, Governance Working Group Structure, etc. that are activity being worked on.

https://social.coop/about
https://social.coop/bylaws
https://www.loomio.org/socialcoop/
https://opencollective.com/socialcoop
https://wiki.social.coop/Main_Page

Beyond that the best place to see and document any informal "complex collective practices" would be to engage in all the working groups and document from there.

Hope that helps.

M

mike_hales Fri 15 Jun 2018

Thanks robert. I'll pick this up as I get the opportunity.

LS

Leo Sammallahti Wed 13 Jun 2018

Lot of good points, the slide show by @mattnoyes looks good and we should figure out how to use it.

MK

Michele Kipiel Wed 13 Jun 2018

Here's an idea: I am seeing lots of valid points against drafting a governance proposal for a hypotethical Mastodon Coop, but that doesn't mean we can't turn that draft into an article. Wouldn't it be cool if we kicked off our blog with an article about "what would happen if mastodon went full coop"?

LS

Leo Sammallahti Fri 15 Jun 2018

I like that. Writing an article could be a good first step, hopefully it will get good feedback and new people involved, which will help it expand to something bigger. I don't see the two as mutually exclusive, but writing an article first, and then expanding it later to a more "action-plan" type of documents.

M

muninn Wed 13 Jun 2018

"as a person discovering social.coop I still can't see any place to get a picture of the whole venture . . . purposes, persons, projects, media spaces."

I'm not new any more and I still find this to be true for myself, it's scattered across a lot of loomio threads and the like. Of course it's yet more work for somebody to put together a blog and for people then to update it, but it'd be a nice point of contact and I definitely would have cruised through and read about s.c if a blog/etc existed. Also it'd be cool to put brief updates about software upgrades or whatever else there.

M

mike_hales Thu 14 Jun 2018

Nice one, @michelekipiel :ok_hand:

MN

Matt Noyes Fri 15 Jun 2018

I like the idea of highlighting popular (or otherwise selected) toots from social.coop. This is a great way to show off the range and quality of content generated. (Equity and inclusion should be one criterion, of course.)
Articles and Interviews (great idea!) should be published in existing coop/FLOSS blogs, to help others grow and prosper and to build recognition of social.coop in the coop/tech world.
The "blueprint for a cooperative Mastodon" piece would be great to put on various blogs, for instance.

MK

Michele Kipiel Mon 18 Jun 2018

The "blueprint for a cooperative Mastodon" piece would be great to put on various blogs, for instance.

I will start working on this ASAP!

RB

Robert Benjamin Mon 18 Jun 2018

Let me know if you need any contributors.

M

mike_hales Sat 23 Jun 2018

Hi @mattnoyes I'm glad to have met yesterday in the Reading group. I referred to the project that I seem to be adopting here in this thread starting here. Not quite ready to pick this up yet, but when I do, would like to return to you for guidance & comment, drawing on some of what we and @emido @caitlinwaddick @michelekipiel talked about. Would be glad to have an email connection for some of this but you're not mailable thro your Loomio profile. Would you mail me via mine, if you're OK to drop into 1-to-1 email at some point? Thanks. I'll welcome any input from others yesterday too :)

@christinahendricks was thinking of joining the 'editorial' project, hi Christina. You might want to see the notes I left in the reading group thread - some questions in there, about the scope and nature of social.coop.

MN

Matt Noyes Sun 24 Jun 2018

Mike, sent you a message via social.coop

MK

Michele Kipiel Sun 24 Jun 2018

Feel free to contact me privately! :)