[FM Discuss] credits

[adam hyde]

hey,

On Sun, 2008-01-13 at 19:47 +0100, Derek Holzer wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I think this way of crediting seems most appropriate for most of the 
> cases. I agree with Julian that if 90% of the material was written by 
> myself (for example), then the credits should reflect that. And most of 
> the time, one person has set out the structure and feel of the manual at 
> the very least, with others filling in whatever gaps are left. When we 
> have a really and truly collectively-written manual, we could revisit 
> this issue, of course.
> 

The Audacity manual is the best example of a collaboratively written
manual in FM with chapters contributed by myself, Anthony Oetzmann, and
Adam Willetts. 

For me, I am quite happy being credited as a collaborator for this
manual, and the manuals where I am the main writer (eg. MuSE). So
increasingly, I think maybe its a matter of the main contributors (where
this can be identified) deciding what they prefer. 

However I would really like to underline the collaborative nature of
production. If a manual, for example, is mainly written by one person
then there maybe many others that come across the work and wish to clean
up layout, spell check, contribute chapters, tweak etc. We should be
careful to leave the door open to these people so they are also
motivated to contribute. My worry about crediting explicitly one person
as the 'writer' is fine and deserved in many cases (such as Blender),
but it might not necessarily communicate well that anyone can contribute
and hence may deter contributions.

These issues are also reflected in the world of Wikipedia vs Knol.
Google are starting a (sort of) encyclopedia (Knol) where the author of
a doc gets a prominent credit. This is their answer to Wikipedia (where
authorship is dissolved to some extent).

Wikipedia is a very interesting community production model, whereas the
Knol model is explicitly about building authorship. The differing
emphasis underlies the fact that the two groups are motivated by very
different things. 

My question is, are we a Wikipedia or a Knol? Can we reduce FM to these
basic models or are we something different?.

Intertwined in this is the question - what motivates people (ie. you) to
contribute to FM?

How we manage credits, I believe, should reflect how we would answer
these questions.

For those interested in Knol check out the interesting analysis on
Wikipedia Weekly #39 - http://wikipediaweekly.org/ (and check out #38
for an v.interesting interview with Brianna).

adam





> best,
> d.
> 
> Luka Princic / Nova Viator wrote:
> 
> > manual written by
> > Joe Doe and Lisa Smith
> > 
> > with contributions from
> > Adam
> > Luka
> > Derek
> 
> 
-- 
Adam Hyde
FLOSS Manuals

http://www.flossmanuals.net