me: Wow! E D Kain, I follow his stuff on T/S, he
is great.
Barrett: I don't think I've seen it yet, I'll take a
look
also
just had a couple quick thoughts
me: Justin Commu
looks great, too, I will get something off to him later today, and some
other people
Sent at 12:33 PM on Friday
Barrett: Have
participants randomly matched and assigned a collaborative method and
task
we should think up
several sorts of methods by which two people could collaborate in a
particular "structure,"
and then
randomly assign two participants to use that structure in coming to a
conclusion or accomplishing some small task
this would give us insight into what might work best
also, having two participants randomly
collaborate in general might produce interesting results due to the
mixing of various skill sets
another
thing
Scott and I talked the
other day about having there be a probability that any info pushed
forward into either networks would have a chance of appearing somewhere
else randomly in the network in addition to where it would usually be
sent
Sent at 12:37 PM on Friday
Barrett: as means
of ensuring that the raw material on one end of the network has a
chance to appear at another portion of it, which I think will clearly
have certain differing characteristics due to being "inhabited" by
bloggers who have linked to each other, in the case of the media network
and which would thus possibly do
something better with that raw material or have some other insight into
it than would those from the region of the network from which it
originated
it's a small thing,
but possibly helpful
Sent at 12:39 PM
on Friday
me: so a blogger on a lower echelon whose posts
have merit but are being stifled by his immediate superior would have
chance
Sent at 12:41 PM on Friday
me: chance of wider readership despite an idiosyncratic bias of the
blogger who brought him in
Barrett: yeah,
and in fact I think we should also integrate in similar methods to
tackle any structural deficits that are still going to exist, like that
one
me: up in the paired collaboration model I am not
sure what you mean by 'structures'
Sent
at 12:44 PM on Friday
me: i am fishing
for an example I guess
Sent at 12:45 PM
on Friday
Barrett: sort of like this
there are various games like scattegories,
scrabble, various card games, charades, whatever adults play at shitty
parties
and these all either
have participants interpret input from each other or produce it
together, according to certain rules
we could design various procedures in a similar vein
intent on producing different sorts of
results, as if they had been filtered, distorted, magnified, etc
metaphorically
we would then draw conclusions based on how the
participants deemed the process method and what we see in the results
and perhaps implement similar novel
methods when it comes time to setting up the governing network
or a template for procedures within
sub-projects like Africa
Sent at 12:49 PM
on Friday
Barrett: I'm going to ask some of our more
abstract-professioned participants to try to think up such methods
additionally
we should set up another document
containing various questions about both specific
and general aspects of what we're doing and what we should be doing
basically, little "reports"
that can then be displayed in whatever
documents deal with the aspect in question
Sent
at 12:53 PM on Friday
Barrett: this is
just a way of making sure that our participants have quick and easy
access to everything that needs to be considered or determined and thus
doesn't miss a chance to contribute his expertise or ideas
Sent at 12:54 PM on Friday
me: sort of
sounds like we need an "internal systems" team (forgive the
bureaucrat-speak) to find or maybe build the automated support for
the interfacing of these pieces of content, This new guy Justin Commu
sounds as if he could do that
Sent
at 12:58 PM on Friday
me: although if he
is currently looking for employment, he may not have much time, once
he finds it
Sent at 1:01 PM
on Friday
me: how do I save this chat? I guess I can paste
it into an e-mail and send it to myself