Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[liberationtech] Stanford Liberationtech: Ready for migration?

Yosem Companys ycompanys at gmail.com
Tue Sep 4 20:17:48 PDT 2018


Hey Louis,

My answers below inline in blue.

Hm. I was just not wanting to make more work later.
>

This is why I think it's best to get as many comments as possible now so
thank you for sharing your perspective.


> Okay, but then it would be nice to know, for instance, if comments posted
> here, now, would be later collated in, say, a wiki, or equivalent. Think of
> it is a searchable history, should the archives to this particular list be
> unobtainable in the proximate future.
>

The plan is to port the entire list, so, yes, the archives would continue
to be publicly available. Plus a number of subscribers have mirrored the
archives, so they're already available elsewhere anyway.


> Which brings me to a basic point. If the funding will be handled by an
> established project (which is good), and if the LibTech project is to be
> mostly composed of a list or two and a wiki/site, what then would
> differentiate it from other ICT4D sites or projects? I read the Vision
> statement—but it could apply to any number of other humanitarian projects,
> too. I don't mean to be adversarial, at least not unpleasantly so. I mean
> the question honestly.


Not at all. That's a good question. Any suggestions?

>From my experience, I think there are three key differentiators:

   - The emphasis of our community has been on privacy- and
   security-by-design, which most entities lack; and,
   - We've always been a decentralized coalition, whereas most sites are
   centrally owned.
   - We've always done content curation, not so much so these days, but at
   the peak of Liberationtech we were "required reading" for many at the New
   York Times in the words of some NYT journalists I know. In fact, the late
   David Carr featured us in the documentary of the New York Times, and Jim
   Dwyer dedicated a chapter to us in his book on the secure, private, and
   distributed social-networking site Diaspora.

So, is the project to be a kind of forum for discussions? Ie., a simple
> thing but one requiring a fair amount of moderation effort.
>

Gonzalo and I collated the community's feedback, and everyone seemed to
want to keep the status quo. We've been community-run since inception so if
that's what the community wants that's what we'll do.

You're correct that we'll need more moderation help: We used to be an open
list where the moderators would react to violations rather than be
proactive to prevent them. That would likely change going forward on the
main list. But because the idea is to let anyone create their own list on
our platform, they could run the list however they want so long as it fits
our values of universal human rights


> And plus:
> An advocacy site for basically liberal values of social good as understood
> in terms of information technology?
>

This has not been suggested until now. Is that something you'd like to see?

The approach may be fitting considering how the historical context has
changed: These days, I see Liberationtech as carrying the torch of
universal human rights for designing, researching, and using technology for
social good through what has become a dark tunnel of people and
nation-states trying to suppress these rights.

One thing I know from my study of entrepreneurship is that sites typically
begin framing themselves as one thing and typically end up morphing into
something else entirely as they try to meet the needs of their stakeholders.


> > That goes for everyone else. We'll keep this week open for your
> comments. Please feel free to share them publicly or privately, whatever
> you prefer. As of Monday of next week, we'll start implementing.
>
> We being? Yosem and Gonzalo?
>

We have a list of 100+ people who have volunteered to help. So Gonzalo and
I will manage the implementation effort, but the community will do the
heavy lifting.

Please let me know should you have any other questions. As always, I truly
appreciate your taking time to share your thoughts with us.

Thanks,
Yosem


> Cheers,
> Louis
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 12:34 PM Louis Suárez-Potts <luispo at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > On 2018/08/30, at 20:23:16, Yosem Companys <ycompanys at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > Any questions? Anything we overlooked? Please let Gonzalo or me know.
> > >
> > Thanks, Yosem and Gonzalo,
> > The list covers the basics, which is good. I have a few suggestions ,but
> before I pose them to this list, ought I to wait until the new list and
> infrastructure is set up? Personal experience, as well as observed,
> suggests I ought to. It makes the collation of suggestions easier.
> >
> > best,
> > Louis
> >
> > --
> > Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations
> of list guidelines will get you moderated:
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech.
> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator
> at zakwhitt at stanford.edu.
> > --
> > Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations
> of list guidelines will get you moderated:
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech.
> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator
> at zakwhitt at stanford.edu.
>
> --
> Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations
> of list guidelines will get you moderated:
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech.
> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing the moderator
> at zakwhitt at stanford.edu.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/attachments/20180904/a5c786df/attachment.html>


More information about the liberationtech mailing list