Account confirmers, Anti-spam team, Confirmed users, Bureaucrats and Sysops emeriti
4,925
edits
Inform/Overview: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
The resource will be licensed under the [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ Creative Commons CC-BY-SA] licence. The primary language of the resource would be English, with the exception of legislative pages for bills in non-English-speaking countries, which may be but would not need to be. A goal is to support easy translation of the content into multiple languages, although the platform used initially for the content may not have facilities to make this ''easy''. | The resource will be licensed under the [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ Creative Commons CC-BY-SA] licence. The primary language of the resource would be English, with the exception of legislative pages for bills in non-English-speaking countries, which may be but would not need to be. A goal is to support easy translation of the content into multiple languages, although the platform used initially for the content may not have facilities to make this ''easy''. | ||
==Users and Collaborators== | |||
Building a community around ISPM is key to its success. A resource no-one uses is a waste of time, and a resource no-one improves is on its way to becoming a resource no-one uses. | |||
As we establish the culture and style of ISPM, we will be able to publicise it more and get wider involvement. Our users would be anyone who wanted to talk to a policymaker; we would hope that a link to the ISPM page on a particular bill would become part of the "Further Reading" or "Resources" sections of emails and websites set up by campaigners sympathetic to Mozilla on a particular bill. This would, of course, include Mozilla campaigns where they existed. We would hope that organizations which used ISPM in this way would come to see its value and would spend time curating and improving the content which related to their particular areas of activity. | |||
==Risks== | |||
In what ways could this go wrong? | |||
===Lack of interest=== | |||
It could be that we start building something nobody wants. The way to mitigate this is to make sure the resource is used from a very early stage. We can use it at Mozilla, and perhaps we can bring one or two other sympathetic organizations on board as well. This document can be shown to thought leaders in various organizations external to Mozilla to see if this is something that they would like to see exist, and would consider using. Also, the outlay is mostly in terms of staff time, which can be reallocated at short notice - there are only minimal up-front costs here (Mozilla IT would provide a server and collaboration software). | |||
===Edited to take positions Mozilla does not support=== | |||
In the places where ISPM takes a position on a policy issue, there is a risk that the consensus among those doing the editing may not be the same as the consensus among Mozillians. While we should take this occurrence as a signal that we should stop and check that ''we'' are on the right track, it does indicate the need for some guidance that we can unite around. So, we can perhaps mitigate this with some high-level "worldview" documents which set out in broad terms the type of Internet that we would like to see, and the principles we apply in trying to get there. Those documents may be Mozilla-specific (such as the Manifesto) or they may be written for ISPM. | |||
===Unwelcoming and pedantic community=== | |||
To an extent, 'the Wikipedia problem'. As ISPM will be several orders of magnitude smaller than Wikipedia, we hope that we will not need to create the process and bureaucracy on which people who push a community in this direction thrive. | |||
==Use Cases Addressed== | ==Use Cases Addressed== | ||