Cees, I have plagiarised the statement fof principles from the GEODATA link. I personally feel that they have would fulfill our needs better than the NAMA principles.
Please review the attcahed file for comments.
HTH
John Briggs
A fine start! I have a few inline comments.
--- John Briggs johneb47@optushome.com.au wrote:
Cees, I have plagiarised the statement fof principles from the GEODATA link. I personally feel that they have would fulfill our needs better than the NAMA principles.
Please review the attcahed file for comments.
HTH
John Briggs
Principles of the Squeak Foundation:
A. Squeak Foundation is open to any individual or institution subscribing to the purpose and principles in conducting Squeak Foundation activities.
Change "in" to "for".
B. Members have the right to self-organize at any time, on any scale, and around any activity inconsistent with the purpose and principles.
I think we mean either "NOT inconsistent" or "consistent".
C. Authority will be vested in, functions performed at, and resources used by the smallest or most local part that includes all relevant and affected parties.
I'd like better understanding of what this means in the context of the Squeak Foundation.
D. Deliberations and decisions of Squeak Foundation will be made by bodies and methods that reasonably represent all relevant and affected parties and that are dominated by none.
E. Diversity of people, perspectives, and approaches is desirable and will be encouraged.
F. Conflict will be resolved creatively, cooperatively, and constructively.
G. To the maximum degree possible, results will be achieved by persuasion rather than compulsion.
Consider combining F & G, which seem aimed at the same end.
H. Deliberations and decisions of Squeak Foundation will use knowledge and information derived from scientific method, practical experience, and intuition.
I think that in our context, this principle is superflouous. It doesn't hurt anything but I'm not sure it adds as much value here as it does in NAMA.
I. Each and every part of Squeak Foundation will pursue greater coherence in the creation and design of Squeak.
J. Squeak design will be treated as an infrastructure asset, and creative investment of public and private resources to achieve the purpose will be encouraged.
K. Squeak design has an inherent value, and the creators of that value should be equitably compensated.
L. Squeak design and technologies will be used to improve decision making and productivity, consistent with the purpose and principles.
M. Public inspection of Squeak design used for governance is a fundamental right, and access to such information should be provided.
N. Standards essential to achieve the purpose in accord with the principles will be established and implemented.
O. Innovation is essential to achieve the purpose, will be encouraged, and should be fairly rewarded.
P. Each and every part of Squeak Foundation will protect the privacy and confidentiality of personal information.
Q. Knowledge related to achieving the purpose of Squeak Foundation in accord with the principles will be openly and fully exchanged unless disclosure violates confidentiality or materially diminishes competitive position.
R. Squeak design and technologies will be used to improve the viability of Squeak in all its different implementations
===== ------- Dan Shafer, Author and Community Consultant ^. .^ | Commentator on Community, Web Building, Nanotech ='= | Sr. Co-Editor, Online Community Report | Author, NanoTech, MegaQuake: Business Implications of Squeak| Nanotechnology (Spring 2002), Wiley, ISBN 047120045X ------- http://www.gui.com (major update Spring 2001)
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/
dshafer@yahoo.com said:
C. Authority will be vested in, functions performed at, and resources used
by
the smallest or most local part that includes all relevant and affected parties.
I'd like better understanding of what this means in the context of the Squeak Foundation.
It's an important principle that makes sure that authority is distributed as much as possible. If there's e.g. a release building group, that group has the authority to pronounce something a release, they don't need to go to (for example) the doundation's top level to ask for permission. And if they want to organize themselves as a publicly held corporation, that's OK as long as they don't conflict with the whole's Principles and Purposes.
Consider combining F & G, which seem aimed at the same end.
They're all aimed at the same end :-). But F is about conflicts (exceptional situations), G about the normal way of achieving results. They both have their place.
I think that in our context, this principle is superflouous. It doesn't hurt anything but I'm not sure it adds as much value here as it does in NAMA.
Agreed, I think we can leave that out (certainly for now - we can always put it back in later if the actual activities seem to indicate it would be useful).
johneb47@optushome.com.au said:
I have plagiarised the statement fof principles from the GEODATA link. I personally feel that they have would fulfill our needs better than the NAMA principles.
Thanks for the work. Did you put it on the Swiki? (retorical question, I just checked. It'd be nice if you could put it on, so we could use it as a starting point for collaborative editing).
I'm not to sure though about item I ff. Apart from the absence of a definition of "Squeak design", some attempts at fitting in a definition really didn't bring up anything that clicked with me. This whole part feels "foreign" to me (save from some useful single items).
Furthermore, but I may be standing alone in this, I still think that regarding Squeak as an ecosystem rather than a bit of intellectual property is the right way to approach this subject. Am I alone in this?
--- Cees de Groot cg@cdegroot.com wrote:
Furthermore, but I may be standing alone in this, I still think that regarding Squeak as an ecosystem rather than a bit of intellectual property is the right way to approach this subject. Am I alone in this?
Absolutely not. I, for one, am completely behind you on this point.
===== ------- Dan Shafer, Author and Community Consultant ^. .^ | Commentator on Community, Web Building, Nanotech ='= | Sr. Co-Editor, Online Community Report | Author, NanoTech, MegaQuake: Business Implications of Squeak| Nanotechnology (Spring 2002), Wiley, ISBN 047120045X ------- http://www.gui.com (major update Spring 2001)
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/
squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
cg＠cdegroot.com -
Dan Shafer -
John Briggs