Global Oneness Project

In checking around what you usually see in forums, etc is something that turns embedded material either on or off - see it or not. It would be innovative to have the choice be to show the embed or just the link (rather than nothing at all). This is the kind of interface design that supports high or low bandwidth.

We often forget how scarce broadband coverage is in rural areas. it's a huge issue on the north coast (mendocino/humboldt). And yet, for movements like this it is essential to support people - like David - who are out there doing much of the important work that points the way for everyone else.

I am all for this one.

How about an explanation of how the watchlists work? I don't see how to use them. I have a preference item that shows activity, but there isn't any activity because i am not sure how to use them.

I agree. I noticed that too.

home page button on every page - gotta have it.

I don't understand why the groups should be so differentiated from the main of WE. Can you say more about the philosophy that was driving that?

The last thing I think WE should do is try to be like MySpace. it was just an example of how they improved things there by adding that feature.

WE needs to do everything it can possibly do to improve interaction between the users. Regardless of intent, there needs to be many more people using this thing or it isn't going to really get off the ground. Knowing who is live on a site increases the sense of place. I would say that if someone finds it distracting then don't pay attention to it. I know that some groups are spamming the users, but that happens everywhere. What I am not worried about is people who aren't that concerned about sustainability spending a lot of time on WE. there are plenty of more rewarding places for them to hang out than here if they seek something other than the main focus of WE.

It would be easy enough to have a user setting that allowed one to show/hide embedded stuff. i know that if you are dialup for example it make everything too slow. But I think the forums will never really get off the ground until they let people freely show what they mean right there in the posting.

(the post below is a partial bit of this post so never mind that one)

Here is a link to a blog post by the always brilliant Kevin Kelly on the idea that bottom-up group endeavors improve faster when they are actually a hybrid between being purely determined by the totality of the users and a smaller group that performs editing and direction functions. He uses Wikipedia as a main example, but I think that his remarks are relevant to Wiser Earth and the goal of turning the whole thing over to the users.

http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2008/02/the_bottom_is_n.php

Here is a bit of it:

Here's how I sum it up: The bottom-up hive mind will always take us much further than even seems possible. It keeps surprising us in this regard. Given enough time, dumb things can be smarter than we think.

At that same time, the bottom-up hive mind will never take us to our end goal. We are too impatient. So we add design and top down control to get where we want to go.

The systems we keep will be hybrid creations. They will have a strong rootstock of peer-to-peer generation, grafted below highly refined strains of controlling functions. Sturdy, robust foundations of user-made content and crowd-sourced innovation will feed very small slivers of leadership agility. Pure plays of 100% smart mobs or 100% smart elites will be rare.

The real art of business and organizations in the network economy will not be in harnessing the crowd of "everybody" (simple!) but in finding the appropriate hybrid mix of bottom and top for each niche, at the right time. The mix of control/no-control will shift as a system grows and matures.

Judged from where we start, harnessing the dumb power of the hive mind will always take us much further than we can dream. Judged from where we hope to end up, the hive mind is not enough; we need an additional top-down push.

One thing I do know from experience is that once you confer a right on someone or some group it is difficult to take it away without inevitable bad feelings and quarreling from those who see those rights or powers diminished. This is one reason - maybe the main reason - why I think it isn't a good idea to give away too much too soon, especially when it comes to governance beyond direct editing for accuracy and timeliness. It IS good to discuss it so when the system is more set you aren't groping around without having thought it through, but if there aren't real problems that need to be solved by granting a lot of powers to groups of people, then I wouldn't do it. There is plenty of time still for such things and it will be more clear later what's needed.

I'd like to see a stronger sense of who else is on in real time with you while you are logged in. MySpace does that pretty nicely I think. And then I'd like to have some facilities for quick live communication. Or this might be another case where WE works in conjunction with some other service. Reagrdless, those things create a better sense of place. And even if you aren't using it, you know that you could. Some might do it a lot, who knows. i do think that WE self-selects for people who want to focus on certain values and issues and are thus predisposed to want to interact. Just gotta get 'em the tools. And real time is fun. Plus I have recently worked with teens and it is their preferred online method.