Chapter 1 discussion > We Are Smarter Than Me | Forums

Forums > Discussions From the First 'We' Book > Chapter 1. We Can Do It

Subject: Chapter 1 discussion

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 1 of 3

Author

Messages

Rating:

iphazard
Posts:87

10/16/2006 4:33 PM	Alert
Any reactions to chapter 1 of the book? Suggestions for future direction? Let's kick off a discussion. Reply to this thread or start your own.

supten
Posts:1

10/19/2006 3:04 AM	Alert
As in Wikipedia, do we have a list of references (sources for citation) at the end of each chapter or will it be at the end of the book?

Keeper of Light
Posts:1

10/20/2006 8:51 AM	Alert
I have just joined We are Smarter than Me community, so my comment and question are of a newbie here. First, it seems strange to me to call something Chapter 1 and thn use it to introduce subsequent Chapters. Why not give it the title Introduction and then list the Chapters? Further, this is an exciting and different project. I believe that the language and approach to it should reflect it too. For instance, how do we introduce pictures and graphs here? As I read this first Chapter, I am far from swept away in excitement or novelty. More to the point, the titles for subsequent Chapters are following the conventional business disciplines. For instance, what is this about Marketing? Your examples show that growth in new services and products is not product of marketing - so why not follow up what REALLY made a shift?

barry
Posts:72

10/20/2006 9:59 AM	Alert
Well, this is why we established the discussion groups, and the project itself. We may indeed be taking too traditional an approach to the content of the book. And based on our discussions to date, my colleagues and I are certain that we are taking too traditional a view on the structure of the book. But - we felt we needed an initial structure so people could figure out how to engage. So we established this structure as a starting point. It would be great if you would do one of two things - either (a) rewrite Chapter 1, or parts of it, to make it more exciting from your perspective, or (b) simply put your text into the "Miscellaneous" section at the bottom of the table of contents. We're going to create new chapters from that material. And one last point - don't feel like you have to write an entire chapter to contribute. Just start with three or four paragraphs that reflect your basic view of the world, and then you and others can build on that over time. Hope this is helpful. - Jon Spector

joe_flum
Posts:151

11/04/2006 4:35 PM	Alert
I think it is correct to start off with the base structure, so that we can all have that jumping-off point. However, perhaps it would be prudent to look into creating a taxonomy of the key-concepts that map out the book's topic. By putting forward a TOC and then filling in our thoughts, we are essentially using a top-down approach, which to me is counter intuitive to the theme of the book. The key to any emergent system (or book in this case), is to infuse its development with the necesarry mechanisms to allow it to grow into something unexpected. I'm not sure what those mechanisms may be at the moment, but if take a lesson from web applications, one common method is through the use of user ratings of content, allowing individual content to percolate to the top based on their overall value to the community. I'm sure that almost all of our members have had some level of experience in writing and structuring their arguments. While in traditional contexts this is a great benefit. Perhaps in this context, we should identify and challenge our assumptions in the hopes that amidst all this shake-up we are presently suprised with somethign that is truly unique. With respects to the first Chapter, it is imperitive that the spirit of the project really shines through. Introductions (not chapters), are great for giving that flavour, specifically from a more personal side, in order to understand the human aspect of "social" and "community" based interaction. By seperating the introduction out, Chapter 1 could then focus on a more specific investigation through the process and assumptions with which the book was created. For it is in the process that we are currently participating in that forms the meta-text of the book. The primary text being the actual case-studies and experiences that illustrate our points. In end, I am new to this project, so I'll need some time to assimilate everything. I am sure if we as a community are capabale of leaving our comfort zone here, we will be able to produce something of considerable note. cheers, - joe

barry
Posts:72

11/06/2006 6:28 AM	Alert
joe - thanks, we will start making the changes you suggested this week. Barry

oamprimo
Posts:7

11/06/2006 10:50 PM	Alert
Bonjour, I agree that the structure of the Book as it is suggested is kind of Top Down but there is a need for a start. I don't think this should block us from making suggestions to have this initial blueprint smartly evolving and cristalizing. And that is the beauty of the tool to help us to do so. Anyway I personnaly take this as a live experimentation by itself and have no pressure on delivery or quality. The journey is the fun side, not the destination. I would suggest to have a specific part explaining how come we are finally ending in a community spirit while we have been raised for generations in an individualistic perspective. Obviously there is a need behind. I can use part of my previous research work in management to craft an answer specific for organizations. Does that make sense? Cheers, Olivier

joe_flum
Posts:151

11/07/2006 2:16 AM	Alert
This is an interesting point Olivier: "I don't think this should block us from making suggestions to have this initial blueprint smartly evolving and cristalizing." Structure is a wonderful thing, because it gives us the ability to ground our thinking and build on a solid foundation. It's danger lies in letting the structure control how new ideas are proposed and explored. So as you say, we shouldn't get 'blocked' by the initial setup. It is in fact, a jumping-off point. It appears to me that this project is in a very early stage, so it is definately important that we address these ideas sooner rather than later. In order to allow for the "evolving and crystalizing" that Olivier touched on, it would be great to understand more clearly, what mechanisms we as a community will use for implementing change to the overall plan? It's a given that things will change throughout the next year. We all have high expectations for the potential of the project. But what can I do as a user to help shape and mold this future: 1) Obviously I can contribute my thoughts and reflections to help flesh out ideas and themes. 2) I can directly contribute to the prose of the text. Those are the primary tools we've been presented with. But let's also consider: 3) I can evaluate existing ideas and vote on their relevance to the book. 4) I can dialogue with other members in order to resolve specific issues (let's say a contested viewpoint, or discussions like this regarding structure). 5) I can (just an idea) offer personal expertise to help manage the project (distributing responsibilities). 6) I can spread the word and help further diversify this community. These are just off the top of my head, but I guess the point is, that each of us has specific skill sets and knowledge that will support different aspects of the overall initiative. I think that in order to ensure the kind of evolution that we are looking for, we must consider the multitude of ways in which we can provide input. The more diverse the input and the more ways to leverage that input, the more powerful the experience will be.

iphazard
Posts:87

11/07/2006 10:15 AM	Alert
Joe, Great points all. This is exactly the type of thinking we are going for. Are you interested in helping manage the project to a certain degree? We are looking for people to take specific interest in a given chapter or two to help guide participation and monitor the contributions. If you are interested, you can email me at ihazard@sharedinsights.com To your initial point, while I agree that there is a lot of structure in the current set up, the idea is that the structure is there to stimulate creativity, not stifle it. I think that some sort of direction is necessary. People are already adding chapters and new ideas, so I'm hopeful that the open ended nature of the end of the table fo contents does in fact leave enough room for suggestions and creativity. Isaac Hazard Community Manager

joe_flum
Posts:151

11/09/2006 9:52 AM	Alert
Isaac, I sent you a mail, but haven't had a response...not sure if you're spam filter is interfering. Can you please send me a mail to: joe at restatemedia dot com I am definately interested in helping out where-ever I can, so maybe you could fill me in with what the project currently needs. cheers, joe

Oldedit
Posts:12

11/16/2006 8:16 AM	Alert
As someone who's been chatting on line since the early 80s and running a message board for five years, this is an exciting project. I have a couple of thoughts after spending about an hour here. 1. I'm a bit confused about the roles of "comments," "discuss," and "edit." 2. In the comments, I found I couldn't edit my comments. Is there a reason for this? Most message board and wiki software allows people to edit their comments whenever they feel the need. If people feel their mistakes will just hang out there, they won't be very inclined to take the risks of contributing. 3. As far as the introduction and sample chapters are concerned, I'm wondering whether some pertinent questions need to be asked to stimulate participation? What are the issues, problems, opportunities, scenarios, probabilities, legal implications, competitive challenges that we're trying to address. 4. As a writer and editor and sometime ghost writer, I know a lot of people who can't write love to edit for content, if nothing else. Everyone needs an editor, for content, if not for style. How can we encourage the first draft writers to let it all hang out and show their creativity and the content experts to comment on the first drafts? I'm not sure I see a structure for that here, but maybe that's the nature of wikis, which I've never written. Maybe non writers will just jump in once they have something to which they can react?

Oldedit
Posts:12

11/16/2006 8:19 AM	Alert
Another thing I've noticed is that my real name is attached to "comments" and my user name appears in "discuss." Doesn't quite make sense to me. Thoughts?:confused:

joe_flum
Posts:151

11/16/2006 10:44 AM	Alert
Donald, let's try to address the confusion. Before getting to each of your points, a quick disclaimer. As you've probably noticed, the site is in a "beta" state. Meaning that while it is functional, it is still being developed as we speak. While I can't speak for Isaac (the community manager) and the SharedInsights team (who are developing the site), from my observations, there are a number of functionalities which aren't fully operational. Up until now, the site has been launching new functionalities ever so often, to test them out and work any bugs out of the system. It's up to us as a community to post exactly these sorts of the doubts or questions so that the WASTM platform can be fine-tuned. No on to your points: 1) Within the wiki, the buttons for "comments", "discuss" and "edit" are meant to allow quick access to the relevant information and interfaces. Comments are pretty straight-forward, basic reflections on the page. Discuss, I believe is a link back into the forum. As it appears right now, I don't think it's fully functional, or perhaps it requires an admin user to create topics. The Edit button is linked to the editing page for the wiki. As a wiki, almost all the pages are open to community editing. So if you see something that you'd like to edit, click the edit button and get in there with your own words. 2) The comments have never really been editable. Since you are familiar with other forum and blogging tools, it's probably good to underline the fact that it appears that this site is running under SharedInsights own platform and not any one of the standard open-source projects that are floating around there. So we need to be a little more patient with them as they bring the feature set up to what we are accustomed to in the more established systems. 3) If you go to the "Home" page in the wiki, you will see a list of the "challenges" that the book is trying to address. The structure of the book is still a work in progress (to which you are welcome to contribute), but essentially I understand it like this: - The "objective" of the book is to explore the opportunities that communities and social networking offer to business and the implications that are involved. - This objective has been broken down into "challenges", that each express key areas of the business, from management, to research, to marketing etc. - Challenges are then broken into "themes". Each theme meant as a possible direction to explore the challenge. In this way, we all have the ability to expand or direct the disucussion a little. If you think that there is a part of doing business that is not covered in the challenges, then propose it to the community manager Isaac Hazard. If you think that there is a theme related to a challenge that we (the community) haven't identified yet...edit the page and add it in. 4) This brings up an EXTREMELY IMPORTANT point. What your talking about is roles within the community. Some may feel more like editors and others more like writers. But I think it goes further than that. I'd like to open this topic up as a new thread so that we can begin to identify the different participation schemes that members can use. 5) real name vs user name. It appears to be an inconsistency between the wiki application and the forum application. Which do you think makes sense? If you have any other questions, I'd be happy to help out. Even though it's from the perspective a fellow member. cheers, joe

Oldedit
Posts:12

11/16/2006 12:19 PM	Alert
Joe, Thanks for the detailed reply. Since I jumped in this morning, I've discovered the other threads that are discussing forum functionality, etc. So I'll probably comment in those rather than drag this thread out. As a bylined writer my whole career, I don't mind using my real name, but I think most corporate types are going to want to be identified by their handles until it's time to give out credit for contributions to the wiki and book. I don't know if it will be possible to make such a tranfer from the wiki to the book, or whether people should be given a choice. It occured to me that the wiki is designed to give people credit. Therefore real names are used. Message boards can become pretty contentious, and people may want handles on the board. But, we've already seen you've identified me in a second by putting 1 and 1 together, and others will do the same with frequent contributors and active posters on the board. I have chapter ideas and questions about content, but not sure where to post them?

conniereece
Posts:1

11/16/2006 12:29 PM	Alert
Addressing a question raised by earlier commenters -- Introduction vs. Chapter 1. It's a good question and one the publishing industry grapples with. (I spent 10 years in the industry as a writer/ghostwriter/copy editor.) There's a common perception among publishers that people simply don't read Introductions; they skip that part and go straight for Chapter 1. As a result, most of the books I worked on used the first chapter as the introduction. Perhaps the question here is: To what extent should this new creative process (writing collaboratively on a wiki) change the traditional publishing process, where the publisher's editorial, marketing and sales teams work with the authors to wind up with a viable book for the business trade.

joe_flum
Posts:151

11/16/2006 12:37 PM	Alert
Donald, Regarding where to post your suggestions, I'd consider the following: 1) Do my suggestions relate to a specific challenge that currently exists in the wiki? For instance, suggestions regarding the structure of the book make Challenge 1 the most appropriate, since it discusses the overview of the book and how the book will be presented. 2) Take the chance to read through the themes of each chapter (for those that have them). By reading the themes you should get a quick overview of what kinds of issues the chapter is discussing. If your ideas don't appear in the theme but are definately related, then feel free to add your new theme directly into the page (by pressing the edit button). 3) If steps 1 and 2 haven't help you find a good place for your thoughts, then don't worry about it. Add a topic into the general discussions forum. The main thing is to get your ideas out and into the community. From there we can all help you develop the ideas. cheers, joe

Oldedit
Posts:12

11/16/2006 12:49 PM	Alert
Should our posts about process and the web site be moved to general discussion from Chapter !?

joe_flum
Posts:151

11/16/2006 1:01 PM	Alert
Again just remember that this is my opinion as a member of the community, but I think it makes sense to keep any discussion regarding the structure of the book in Chapter 1, and have any discussion which are about how the community could work and how the site works in General discussions (for now). Maybe in the future it will warrant its own forum. Let's see what Isaac has to say on the subject, since he is the only one who has the power to move topics around.

1ofus
Posts:103

11/16/2006 5:47 PM	Alert
I am confused regarding the Forums associated with Chapters. Let me explain. I have started with the new structure - great - and as is my way, lloked at the top level to make comments about the challenges/questions and associated titles. This went into the Comments for the Home page. Is there going to be separate Comments and Forums for each Chapter?

joe_flum
Posts:151

11/16/2006 5:53 PM	Alert
It seems that way. Although I'm not sure what the comments are really for. I guess the distinction is that a comment isn't meant to create dialogue, it's more for adding feedback that you aren't looking for answers to. The Forums are for getting into discussions, so if you want other people to respond to you, you'd write them here.