No one takes any action without voting
MAK (yes) KS (yes) RK (yes) CK (yes) PG (yes)
can we make this our new top theme ?
KS (yes) MAK (yes) RK (yes) CK (yes) PG (yes)
each group needs a decision-making mechanism .
it’s useless to invite someone to a group, but there is no group at all, only a few lone wolves .
our voting is a beginning, but there are still some lone wolves .
Beware of some wolf packs also 😉
if we want to be better we must find a thing where we all can say yes .
I think, KVSS as a specialist in group processes (see twitter group) can tell us a little bit more .
There is no group at all, only a few lone wolves .
Interesting statement. I think group and group action are not evident unless the group has an objective or goal to achieve. I keep on telling one thing for social action groups. Every social action group will have times when only one man seems to be active. Rest will not be there anywhere around to be seen. But suddenly an issue comes up and one may see hundred members rallying around and shouting and acting. I think knol author foundation has better participation rate.
If we still feel there is no group at all, it is because we are not taking up a project and successfully achieving its ends. But knol is not a football game where only one goal post is there. Knol is a multi-day marathon with rest and sleep breaks. So there will be lone wolves who run ahead. They may socialize during running and also socialize during their rest break and also socialize after they complete their running schedule. But running they only have to do and during that time they may act like lone wolf.
Let us come together and create a group project and increase group cohesion.
KAF has a project, we can say “yes” : the writing contest .
but that means, that all the other authors have to say “yes”, and there is a group saying “no” .
e.g. I’m sure Garry Jenkins is able to write a splendid article about the future of knol or what it should be .
but he will not do . not for the contest .
your own activities are also good for knol . we all have our own activities .
we all wish, there would be a group for that . so we first have to make a group .
We have a genuine group spirit. We sometimes argue a lot but we have a group spirit. All the contributors to the BB keep doing complementary things. The founders of KAF keep doing similarly. The BB would not have come up to this stage without your involvement. KAF would not have gone this big but for Randy’s efforts. SK still dreams of collecting resources and financing KAF in a big way. Now he makes small according to him but big according to me offers. I ask him to calm down. PG is the mature man who has come forward with significant statements at all critical times. Our group is certainly an achieving group on knol.
You said the most appropriate thing. KAF has a project, we can say “yes” : the writing contest .
We need to think of what we are going to do about it in the next 45 days. You help us in thinking and doing as a group. May be we will learn from the experience and improve in the future. There is no risk now for our group. We have sustained our activity for one year six months. A long time and we developed relationships. We can try various initiatives without any anxiety or tension. Some will succeed and some may not. That is how things happen in the future.
Let us take up the KAF writing contest in group decision making and action way.
what about making the whuffy thing a group activity (KAF account) ?
Propose the mechanics, explain the mechanics. If required go for voting and start.
I thought of an account managed by a group where everyone can make proposals .
if there is only one “no”, nothing will happen . so all need to agree .
if the discussion takes too much time, we can propose a mechanic .
I request 😉 you to open such a page . I will immediately take part .
can we make this our new top theme ?
shall do. But first we need to discuss in that knol how we want operate that account.
I made two entries :
journal 2010-06-22 : KS @ KAF : 100 W
whuffy : KS : -138 (6/22)
now we need a page “KAF account”, where we can write : 2010-06-22 : 100 (KS)
I propose that this account can not be negative .
I shall open a knol and first let us describe the concept and mechanics. Then we will go for a vote whether KAF members want the system to be put in place. Then we go ahead with it as group activity. (6/26)
I agree . concept and mechanics : any questions or suggestions ?
Opened Whuffy – Make Everybody Happy
you didn’t make me happy . why it’s not open collaboration ? where are your questions and suggestions ?
KVSS @ KS
good one. Yes, I shall make it open collaboration. You are the man with maximum understanding of the concept and mechanics. Please explain it to some extent. Let others join the discussion. We will prompt the discussion from this bulletin board and suggestion board. PG could be the main man to analyze the scheme as rational and result giving or irrational and not worth the trouble. Let us try and ask more persons more pointedly so that they will join the discussion.
yes, PG is the right for us . as each other co-author is . I don’t know if i’m the man with maximum understanding of the concept and mechanics. for me it’s a very simple idea (perhaps it’s even too simple for you ;-)) . but I’ll try to write some words about it .
Dear KS & Team:
“can we make this our new top theme ?.” All rules and regulations like these are merely the means to our top theme: To spread the latest knowledge around the world. Also it does not look good that in spite of our group being there for over 18 months we are still bickering over policy. If we need to discus differences we should open a knol which only we can have access to. At least please do not put it on top and leave it in the comments section.
dear SK please focus on your stuff and let me focus on mine (2010-01-02 / SK 2 KS (3))
through internet for me a dream comes true .
polititics, economy and science come together .
pesonally I called this topics “der baum” “die bank” und “das buch” (tree, bank and book) .
on knol (a book for the world) we can realise a bank for the world (whuffy / google gold) and a tree of trust (world democracy)
Yes, let us take our discussions which are procedure oriented to some other knol. There is a need to listen to SK on this issue.
But I really liked your dreams – Book, Bank and Democracy. You really have big ideas. But there is a need for implementation mechanics. In the case of book I think there is no problem. But both bank and democracy, have not taken off. We need to keep thinking and come up with an acceptable model both within this group as well as outside. Because this group cannot constrain in implementing your models which are more universal.
KS you are right . bank and democracy are not yet understood by the world.
and even book is not fully understood by knol (collections are a first step but instead of a collection browser there is a category browser) .
we can learn this on knol (and knol too) .
I really don’t understand SK’s posting . does it mean he says “no” in the above voting ?
why then he can not say “no” ? what is the matter with him ?
We may keep bringing some disagreements from time to time but that does not affect our working. We converge and diverge as the issue arises but we are still close at relationship level and at issue level we are not that concerned. I think that way we have a good working system. Every body is independent, but we also know there is a necessity of group, so we come together, converge and diverge as the situation unfolds.
The issue of voting is with respect to important changes and we need to take group into confidence in making important changes. May be we do not know that it is important when we are changing, but someone points out that it is important, it becomes important. Most agree with that, so we can remove it now. We need not keep it there all the while.
most agree with “no one takes any action without voting”
you say : “the issue of voting is with respect to important changes”
perhaps we can say : “any action which we think is important”
or better : “any action which we think is worth a discussion” .