The World We Want

OnlineGroups.net

To host discussions of the World We Want? OnlineGroups looks promising. Among other things, the software will allow for varying levels of privacy. The group could be implemented as a blog, wide open for all to read, or it would be implemented as a private group whose membership list was private. The dynamics of privacy, philanthropy, and public policy in a putative democracy (where the most important circles are closed and the most important decisions are off the record) is a fertile topic for discussion - whether in public or by invitation only in a "safe space" I don't quite know. 

Social Networking and Organizing Technology Infrastructure

Bridging from connected conversations to concerted action for The World We Want? The Roots Project: Programmers for the Public Good.

What if....

Ideas for Creating a Conversation Around The World We Want

1. Post chapters on line, perhaps one at a time. Post a short on line chapter summary. Allow comments.
2. Same as 1. above but also have the philanthropist who had been interviewed stop by on a the first day the content is posted and add his or her comments.
3. Same as 2. above but add a short podcast in which the philanthropists answers questions like, "How is your vision coming to life? What has been done since the interview? Are there ways people locally or nationally can get involved?"
4. Same as 3. above but Peter actively invites specific friends via an email or other notice to come to the blog on a specific day to discuss a specific paper. The paper could be included in the email.
5. Same as 4. but Peter himself "hosts" that one day on line forum on a specific topic or paper with invited friends, as well as the net regulars. A few times a day he checks the comments and adds his own, trying to keep the conversation flowing. After "opening day" for that paper, the conversation continues, but Peter checks in less frequently.
6. Establish a small budget for Open Space meetings. $1,000 per location? Offer to contribute that token amount to organizations that organize an Open Space around the world we want in their community. At the end of each Open Space someone would be required to "report back" with notes, photos, and the "buzz." How they do that might be left open, but wherever they post the findings, they should let the central site know, so that site can link and highlight.
7. Same as 6. but encourage local community foundations to organize such meetings. Encourage them to include a mix of funders, nonprofit people, grassroots organizers and volunteers.
8. Establish an email list serv for those who want to organize local events so they can ask one another questions about what has worked or what is planned.
9. Maintain a central on line calendar of scheduled events.
10. Peter to mention the central site in his lectures and speaking engagements and press releases.
11. The book to display the url of the central site.

All of the above could be done with nothing more than a blog at no cost other than the subsidy, if any, for local events. I would be happy to have this site be the blog, or to yield to someone Peter appoints.

Are there other key items, "must haves," that should be included? Are their key functions that we "must have" that exceed what can be done with a blog plus email listerv? The more I think about this, the more it seems to me that the key is the sociological issues discussed above. Will a big philanthropist be willing to do a podcast? Stop by to contribute to a discussion of his or her chapter? Will Peter and others in his network be willing to invite interesting and engaged people to the blog for a specific one day discussion? If such friends of Peter do show up, might they be induced to come back a second time? Might they get engaged? The technology is pretty easy, the hard part, I think, is getting the right mix of people to show up and then playing off what happens as they begin to interact from what may be very different perspectives and life experiences.

Your thoughts?

Scoping out the Needed Technology

What technology would best support The World We Want? Steven Clift at e-democracy recommends an email listserv program called Groupserver. Here is a 20 minute flash video in which Steven demonstrates the functionality. My biggest question is the database. Civicspace has a database, so does Groupserver. How can we get the functionality of both programs without having two databases? (I know Civicspace is working on am "organic groups" listserv function, and raising money to complete development, but I am not sure when it will be functional. Civicgroups seems to be a related initative. Go here for a fascinating screencast.)

Technology must serve sociology to make an impact. The listserv seems essential in drawing into our conversation those for whom email is the only technology they use for social networking. Tracy is in that camp, so is Peter, and so are many, many of the people we need to reach over the age of 50 - prime time for philanthropy and legacy leadership. So a good group listserv program is essential. But so is a good  database.

Buyblue.org seems to be working through many of the same technology issues we are, using Civicspace, with a local and national network.

Just a thought: Say, we offered a good listserv program to the "mavens" we know in social organizing and philanthropy? Let each have his or her own list and be its "Dictator," but with access to an admin person to trouble shoot. Also each individual listserv would feed into a central database, so we could learn of one another's existence and interests. Add a calendar of events for each group, that could be toggled either public or private, and a national webpage listing out the groups and how to join, or apply, and we would have on heck of a powerful social networking tool. The power here is that Tracy and Peter are mavens and specialize in cultivating mavens who in turn each have a list. If we can serve such technology-challenged mavens, we could go a long way with simple technology. As our respective networks touch and join, we get tremendous leverage. To join any group is to be a member of the over-arching group, "The World We Want," and to be invited to certain local and national events. There could be a small charge to mavens to set up their list, and that might pay for the admin support. Bioneers is another national/local, online and face-to-face, model to consider. They too, as I understand it, use Civicpace.

With the line of thought above, I feel quite comfortable. My professional expertise has always been in serving and promoting highly talented people who have their own ways of doing things, and their of own constituency. In supporting Peter, Tracy, and other mavens like them with easy to use technology, and helping them convene grassroots and national events, we simply remove roadblocks and make it easier for them to do what they are already doing. We do not have to create momentum of motion, simply remove obstacles in the path of those "heavy weights" or mavens who are already in motion. How can we help? is the most powerful question. How can we use what we know to help the likes of Peter, Tracy, and their networks to do more effectively what they are doing already?