I like the idea of the feedback being identified with what it is for. With the Razoo system, you identify if it was something you did, something you said, an inspiration, a thank you. When we were working with Arthur Brock, he proposed, and I really liked

• Stones – Originality / Ideas / Eloquence
• Tumbles – Participation / Processing / Community Building
• Gems – Implementation / Practice / Action / Leadership

Yeah, Linda. I like the idea. So would we just have three kinds of feedback: one for each stage of gem? Could a single comment receive 2 tumbles and 1 gem? Where else would we see these? How could someone use the feedback to find the gems on the site?

So Linda if I understand your comment in the welcome thread, we should just tell people that their content is under a CC license?

I could see giving people an option of license. They could choose various CC licenses or none, or something more restrictive.

I do think that people have valid reasons that they haven't chosen the CCAL30 on omidyar.net. I think it comes down to the concern that under the CCAL30 the content can find its way to places that it is no longer in a good context, even if it is attributed to the right people.

Still, it would be nice if we could find some blanket agreement that would cover everyone equally.

Jim,

Currently we can set a filter limit to look at threads based on the feedback. Why couldn't we set filters on each aspect of the gems in the making?

Discussion of how to handle words spoken in the public domain probably deserve their own space. :-)

I like the idea of points with purpose...very much so when related to action and such as well.

>>Still, it would be nice if we could find some blanket agreement that would cover everyone equally.<<

Agreed.

Also, should each group be created under some form of index system (like Wiser Earth's 44 main areas of focus) or something to help give groups context?

We also can do some pretty interesting things with the main ned.com page as well.

It would be interesting if each group would auto-generate a thread each month (ala Crisis in Sudan and Food Chain), so each would have a monthly main discussion area.

It would also be very, very cool if that code (one chunk of code, just one time) could be syndicated to multiple web sites.

A group like The Emancipation Network running their group at ned.com could then syndicate an ongoing monthly discussion based on slavery to multiple web sites dedicated to the same subject.

These are great ideas Mark...

Mark Grimes said:

It would be interesting if each group would auto-generate a thread each month (ala Crisis in Sudan and Food Chain), so each would have a monthly main discussion area.

It would also be very, very cool if that code (one chunk of code, just one time) could be syndicated to multiple web sites.

A group like The Emancipation Network running their group at ned.com could then syndicate an ongoing monthly discussion based on slavery to multiple web sites dedicated to the same subject.

my opinion is that negative feedback is necessary..

I dont' see another alternative at this point.

there has to be some kind of reward/consequence for actions

Thnx.

>>my opinion is that negative feedback is necessary.<<

I agree, and think it can be used without being cruel.

In some ways I would prefer if with +2 (or more) or -2 (or more) to a comment or thread members "signed their name to it". Never been a fan of giving -5 to sign my name and having that also close the comment. Would be nice to have the option to do both.

What about form fields under our personal profiles that encourage all members to share their phone numbers and mailing addresses? The more there are real names, real contact information, real stories, real pictures, real videos, real actions...the more interesting things become (I think).

What if each group owner is responsible for keeping the area of their group friendly, OT etc. If the behavior in the group is deemed unacceptable by some number of the board, the group is folded (timed out) for some amount of time. If the norms are established early and diligently enforced, that could be good. It could also make each person who owns a group a Host/Hostess. Better than the people on razoo who are memebrs f 700 causes to be razoo ambassadors.

Good ones Linda.

I also think (and Jim can confirm), that there are now "semi-private groups" within ned.com... meaning that everyone can read, but only those invited into the group can post.

What about a limit to the number of groups members can start?

What can be best done to keep noise to a minimum, and help focus on action, collaboration, getting work done, etc?

Mark Grimes said:

Good ones Linda.

I also think (and Jim can confirm), that there are now "semi-private groups" within ned.com... meaning that everyone can read, but only those invited into the group can post.

Um, there are several degrees of privacy for groups. The Help group (where you go when you click "Help Index" in the upper left) is an example of a group that only members can edit or create content.

Mark Grimes said:

What about a limit to the number of groups members can start?

What can be best done to keep noise to a minimum, and help focus on action, collaboration, getting work done, etc?

It's going to be interesting having fewer points on this site. Since we don't automatically accumulate points when others read our content, it's not going to be so common to have 10 points to create a new group. I think that might be the limit right there.

~ Mark asked: ~

~ What about form fields under our personal profiles that encourage all members to share their phone numbers and mailing addresses? ~

I'm not really a fan of publishing my personal information to that degree. Real name, sure but if someone wants to call me or send something to me/visit they can pm me for the information.

>>it's not going to be so common to have 10 points to create a new group. I think that might be the limit right there.<<

Excellent.

>>I'm not really a fan of publishing my personal information to that degree.<<

I totally get that. Publishing my work address and cell number is entirely different that other personal information (home address/phone) etc.

An editorial calendar could look something like this...

• September 2007: Partners for Others/international-aid
• October 2007: The Emancipation Network/trafficking
• November 2007: Peace Tiles/AIDS
• December 2007: Life in Africa/orphans
• January 2008: Stop Genocide Now/genocide
• February 2008: SOLID/poverty
• March 2008: Better World Island/technology
• April 2008: Making Cool Stuff Happen/volunteering

Seems like each month the Main ned.com Index Page could feature specific grassroots Ned member organizations (NPO, NGO and social purpose). The monthly feature could outline recent accomplishments, current volunteer opportunities (both real world and online only), small scale fundraising item (for something $500-$5,000), current month actions and goals, etc, etc.

If you click the number "5" after the word "Links" in this video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g RWSRXHWB7c&eurl=

• Sites Linking to This Video:
• 904 clicks from http://www.ned.com/
• 386 clicks from http://www.colourlovers.com/d41d 8cd98f00b204e9800998...
• 226 clicks from http://ned.com/
• 23 clicks from http://www.stopgenocidenow.org/c ategory/iact/iact3/
• 21 clicks from http://stopgenocidenow.org/categ ory/iact/iact3/

...you will see that of the 3,215 visits to that video page since 7/23 that 1,130 came directly from ned.com from just the sites "natural" organic traffic. I think a monthly feature of the orgs on the main page could lead to some pretty interesting opportunities and actions.

where do the ned branded communities like ned Uganda and ned Thailand feature in the proposed editorial calendar?

I'm really not sure I like the idea of 1 month featuring only 1 initiative on the front page. Then you miss the ongoing story... I was imagining something more along the lines of the social edge blogs - key content from the field that gets updated regularly, offering visitors the ability to follow along over time from the home page.

Also, just had a chat with some of my Ugandan friends who observed that awarding more points to those who have more time to read discriminates against those of us with limited bandwidth. We would like to see point systems that reward the people at the grassroots who go to such great lengths to get online and participate.

Today we had a disruption of ned hosting service from 12:20 to 1:30 Eastern time. The problem was a problem with an upstream ISP that affected a sizable region of Vermont. I do think it will be a rare occurance, but it does make me look forward to the day that we have some site sponsors and can migrate to a more stable (and expensive) host.

Wondering about the "group creation function" ... association streams of "business", "community", "social sector" seem unnecessary in that there's so much overlap - it's a cumbersome artifice.

Would rather the streams reflect behaviour - "discussion", "action", "planning" or even "R 'n' R"

Hey jim

Have just notice that when u click on the new up date on omidyar it take u striate to omidyar net,so am woundering if that is supposed to be?.

Hi Peter, those are nice alternatives. Very nice.

I have been deleting the top level groups like public / private / social blah blah that omidyar.net was using to categorize things. I'll delete more soon, (I've left the ones that already had member groups, just in case deleting them broke something.)

The four categories you have there are really attractive, since people are likely to be looking for one and not another when they visit the site.

Hi Jim,

Appreciate your tweaking/adjusting the categorization of groups as opportunity permits.

It's these early shifts that'll allow <ned> to differentiate.

Be well.

Jim said:

Hi Peter, those are nice alternatives. Very nice.

I have been deleting the top level groups like public / private / social blah blah that omidyar.net was using to categorize things. I'll delete more soon, (I've left the ones that already had member groups, just in case deleting them broke something.)

The four categories you have there are really attractive, since people are likely to be looking for one and not another when they visit the site.

I've removed the rest of the top-level groups, and added a Fun group called R 'n' R. I want to wait to hear from the board about trying to separate discussion from action, etc. That seems like something that would take effort to keep separate.

NB

Brad is the first to "neg" a comment here and here ... one of the benefits of a small alpha.

Now ... Brad being Brad, no foul (perhaps).

I'm not sure why a behaviour deplored, by Brad - i.e. anonymous "negging", would be brought to <ned>.

I noticed the negs too 'sigh'. I was a little confused as to why they were deemed necessary.