Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2000 00:55:02 -0800
| From: | John \"sb\" Werneken |
|
john.werneken@gte.net Reply-To: unrev-II@onelist.com |
| To: | "Stanford Bootsrap ToPOst |
| Subject: | Colloquium 4 - Improving Improvement Process |
Just watched colloquium 4.
NOW I am very enthused about this bootstrap concept of Doug's. Guess MY mind is a middle-step mind; neither the vision of "why" nor the details of actual implementation turn me on; but I love the "how to get there" stuff.
Comment on Doug's 1970s research into the journaling of internal documents and especially the citing of external documents: hasn't this largely come to be? Is not that concept alive now, as the world wide web? Admittedly the everyone-edits and the resulting version control are missing.
I appreciated Jerry Glenn showing the Millennium Project as a test bed of CoDIAK. It is much more interesting to me in that sense. Thanks Jerry. (The briefing/decision-influencing aspects and especially the macro-level focus still leave me not enthused at all and almost antagonistic to Millennium, but I intend to look again at their version tracking stuff).
I am sad that the crit.org site still seems to be down. I look forward to reviewing its use in the markup of David Brin's discussion on privacy.
Adam Chayer's discussion of a NEXT STEPS proposal was exciting. I believe I understand an example of a tool to improve improvement now, from use through what it would work like and on to a concept of how it could be built.This is a wonderful step forward for this discussion, IMHO.
One question about Adam's concept: it sounds a lot like Crit; what would be the result of large numbers of users converging on the same document? Chaos, too much stuff to be useful, to much "petrified Portman grits" postings as now infect the somewhat similar project of slashdot.org's postings ?
Perhaps my intuitive concept has some value. (I feel that focus should be on the small, the ad hoc, augmenting the specific tasks of a small group of people voluntarily associating to address a specific issue - as opposed to Millennium-style focus on macro ideas or "All Voices Being Heard" concepts involving huge communities).
Perhaps a specific use of Chayer's concept would have to be narrowly focused and attract a small number of users, or the technology would cease to be useful as innumerable additions were made by a large user community ?
I sure look forward to the thoughts of the rest of you on Adam Chayer's presentation!
John \"sb\" Werneken"
john.werneken@gte.net