[FM Discuss] Recruiting more editors for book sprints

Sun Oct 23 22:14:19 PDT 2011

Very nice to meet you sam. I think you should come join a sprint. There is
a lot to it and I think if you experienced one your concerns would be
satisfied. Always room to improve but I think the tools are good. What we
need. I agree. Is more understanding of the culture of a sprint which is
something we discussed a lot at the last fm meet up. Essentially I need to
train more fm people to faciliate and I started that with elisa and anne
goldenberg. Both from the french fm. If we ggo ahead and do more of these
big sprints we will naturally train more people up. With that comes a
greater level of discourse and these issues can be further addressed ...

There are a few fmers in nyc...michael mandiberg is there and some
others...what about a fm nyc meet, maybe scott would bring down a posse
from toronto...

Adam

> Forgive the top-posting.
>
> I've been lurking here and on IRC for months, but haven't really
> talked or participated very much.
>
> I work as a technical writer: I was the primary writer behind the
> "Linode Library," (http://library.linode.com) and now I'm working on the
> manual for one of those open source non-relational database systems
> (more on this in a couple of months? maybe less.) I've also done a fair
> bit of higher-level editorial-type work.
>
> I think call them what you will but having someone working at a higher
> level (editors, facilitators, meta-writers) while a bunch of people are
> working with research material and constructing text, is absolutely
> essential to getting something that is more "book" than a collection of
> words.
>
> While I wouldn't go as far as institutionalizing it, I have a few
> observations:
>
> - Software projects have had this level of organization and it's totally
>   essential, even projects that aren't formalized or have institutional
>   backgrounds, very quickly get maintainers and leaders who take the
>   point on questions of overall design, as well as leadership around
>   direction and releases.
>
>   There's no need to formalize this role in the book-sprint/floss manual
>   world, but I think it would be nice to understand a bit more about
>   what kinds of things that these folks are actually doing, and what
>   kinds of approaches work best/worst to ensure that books come out at
>   the end.
>
>   The effect of good project management and leadership is really crucial
>   is not to be questioned.
>
> - This point displays my inexperience with booki/floss manuals
>   infrastructure, but I think the tooling for collaboration on
>   documentation/writing projects isn't quite there. Which means there
>   are some things that people have to do that could and will probably
>   get offloaded to tooling in time. I'm thinking about the way issue
>   tracking and distributed editing/revision happens, how changes to high
>   level modifications and reorganization trickles down to people
>   writing, as well as the avoidance of duplication of effort. Right now
>   it takes a person, but I imagine that DocsGit and DocsBugzilla (ok,
>   bad example) will eventually help the process.
>
> So in summary (and just thinking out loud there) but maybe what we need
> is less "institution" and more "understanding," and with than
> understanding some automation to facilitate that work so that sprints
> are more likely to go well.
>
> Finally, is there a FM contingent in New York City (NY, USA), and I've
> just missed it until now? I'm newish to town, but would totally be game
> for getting involved in FM activity if it happens something locally.
>
> Cheers,
> sam/tychoish
>
> On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 06:18:33AM +0200, adam hyde wrote:
>> hey Andy,
>>
>> Its not about editors and writers. It is a fundamentally different
>> dynamic. If you stratify this dynamic you hamper it and impose arbitrary
>> and unnecessary limits. The point is not to have editors and writers but
>> to have collaboration. Imagine if you were playing an editor role with a
>> book of 40,000 words generated in 4 days. To filter that through one
>> person as "the editor" is going to cause a bottleneck that will break
>> the process.
>>
>> This what I mean when I say its the wrong lens through which you are
>> asking the question. You are seeing this as writers and editors. Its
>> not. Its all about collaboration and facilitation.
>>
>> adam
>>
>>
>>
>> On 23/10/11 05:49, Andy Oram wrote:
>>> What you did was pretty extraordinary, Adam, like a grand chess master
>>> watching four boards at once and playing each its own way. I bet there
>>> are certain directions and problems you can pick up quickly now, like
>>> books that are all over the place with no clear audience or purpose.
>>> And
>>> maybe if a facilitator is dedicated a project, he or she can carry out
>>> the jobs I mentioned. The facilitator could be an editor. But I feel
>>> like I was doing something useful that was not just high-level.
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>> On 10/22/2011 11:38 PM, adam hyde wrote:
>>>> hey
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I assume Adam has reached the same conclusions, and that's why he
>>>>> invited floaters to the sprint last week.
>>>>
>>>> I think you might underestimate the role of the meta facilitation
>>>> during
>>>> this event. I dont wish to take issue with your report or diminish
>>>> your
>>>> role but each group was *carefully* watched by myself. If your group
>>>> had
>>>> not progressed with or without you I would have taken the process a
>>>> different route. Its not the necessity of floaters that is at question
>>>> it is the role and nature of the of the facilitation that makes the
>>>> difference. The fact that you didnt see this is a pretty good metric
>>>> of
>>>> successful facilitation. I think your question is using the wrong
>>>> lens.
>>>>
>>>>> So as always I'm pondering the value of professionalism in
>>>>> crowdsourced work like this, and how it can be institutionalized.
>>>>
>>>> There is a tension here that I think is also captured in one of your
>>>> blog posts. Institutionalisation will kill this process. I think you
>>>> are
>>>> fundamentally not understanding the nature of communities and
>>>> collaboration. The publishing industry at large will struggle to make
>>>> headway in this area unless they find a way to get past many of its
>>>> established core cultural values.
>>>>
>>>> adam
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Andy
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>>> Discuss at lists.flossmanuals.net
>>>>> http://lists.flossmanuals.net/listinfo.cgi/discuss-flossmanuals.net
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Discuss mailing list
>>>> Discuss at lists.flossmanuals.net
>>>> http://lists.flossmanuals.net/listinfo.cgi/discuss-flossmanuals.net
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Discuss mailing list
>>> Discuss at lists.flossmanuals.net
>>> http://lists.flossmanuals.net/listinfo.cgi/discuss-flossmanuals.net
>> _______________________________________________
>> Discuss mailing list
>> Discuss at lists.flossmanuals.net
>> http://lists.flossmanuals.net/listinfo.cgi/discuss-flossmanuals.net
>
> --
> tycho(ish) @
> garen at tychoish.com
> http://tychoish.com/
> "don't get it right, get it written" -- james thurber
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at lists.flossmanuals.net
> http://lists.flossmanuals.net/listinfo.cgi/discuss-flossmanuals.net
>