Re: [gaia] How to carry on with the "manyfolks" draft

Ok. I will try to do a "convergent" version of the draft. I was waiting for the opinions of people. Perhaps many of them are on holidays, so we can wait a bit more...

Thanks for your comments, Roger.

Jose

> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Roger Baig Viñas [mailto:roger.baig@guifi.net]
> Enviado el: miércoles, 09 de julio de 2014 10:35
> Para: Jose Saldana
> CC: 'gaia'; 'Arjuna Sathiaseelan'
> Asunto: Re: [gaia] How to carry on with the "manyfolks" draft
> 
> Hi Jose, hi Arjuna, hi all,
> 
> IMHO it is not time to give up yet. What has happened so far (e.i. many
> heterogeneous comments from many different people after a proposal) fits perfectly
> in the first phase of the Divergent and Convergent Thinking methodology. The inputs
> collected and the interest shown by many of us pay off the effort to start the
> convergent phase, where the abstraction capacity is essential, thus we need people
> like you (from the academia and other research institution) to lead it.
> 
> Should we start with a schedule having the meeting on October as the target?
> 
> Regards.
> 
> On Tue 01 Jul 2014 10:04:08 AM CEST, Jose Saldana wrote:
> > Well, this is my view if we want to write a document including everything: many
> people in the list will not agree on using the name "Community Network" for these
> other possibilities, like the ones driven by a company. E.g. I don't think we will be
> able to have consensus for considering FON as a Community Network.
> >
> > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gaia/current/msg00190.html
> > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gaia/current/msg00204.html
> >
> >
> > So if we found a broader name, we could include all the networks under
> discussion ("non-traditional", "user-centric", "free" or "whatever networks"), and CNs
> would be a subset of them.
> >
> > Jose
> >
> >> -----Mensaje original-----
> >> De: gaia [mailto:gaia-bounces@irtf.org] En nombre de Arjuna
> >> Sathiaseelan Enviado el: martes, 01 de julio de 2014 7:04
> >> Para: Jose Saldana
> >> CC: gaia
> >> Asunto: Re: [gaia] How to carry on with the "manyfolks" draft
> >>
> >> i think we should do (1): use the current feedback to revise and get
> >> more contributors onboard. But I am not sure why you are proposing to
> >> change the title of the doc? its like changing the original
> >> vision/goal and from the discussions so far - i dont think thats what
> >> the members suggested - its more about making the classification more
> inclusive.
> >>
> >> Arjuna
> >>
> >> On 30 June 2014 10:16, Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es> wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I have tried to extract the main ideas from the discussion in the
> >>> list, and I have built this document.
> >>>
> >>> https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/67016195/discussion_CN_def_v1.do
> >>> cx
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> As you can see, there are lots of contributions in the list, from
> >>> people with wide experience.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> In my opinion, the first problem to solve is the scope of the draft.
> >>> From my point of view, there are three different ways:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 1- Writing a very broad document including
> >>> “all-the-networks-we-are-talking-about-here”, and then classifying them.
> >>> Community Networks would become a section of the document, and could
> >>> be distinguished from other approaches.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> In this case we should remove the words “Community Networks” from
> >>> the title, and try to find a “broad name” including everything. What
> >>> about a “negative
> >>> definition”?: something similar to NGO: like “non-operator networks”
> >>> or “non-conventional networks”. Perhaps “user-centric networks” can also fit.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2- Writing a number of documents: one about community networks,
> >>> other about FON-like networks, etc.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> This option is really difficult: it will be impossible to find
> >>> consensus when defining the borders between different network models.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 3- Assuming that this is an impossible task. Let’s forget about a
> >>> definition.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> I think this is not an option. The objective of GAIA is writing good
> >>> documents about these things…
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Jose Saldana
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> gaia mailing list
> >>> gaia@irtf.org
> >>> https://irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Arjuna Sathiaseelan | http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~as2330/
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> gaia mailing list
> >> gaia@irtf.org
> >> https://irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > gaia mailing list
> > gaia@irtf.org
> > https://irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
> 
> --
> Roger Baig Viñas
> Fundació Privada per a la Xarxa Oberta, Lliure i Neutral guifi.net
> 
> --
> Roger Baig Viñas
> Fundació Privada per a la Xarxa Oberta, Lliure i Neutral guifi.net