[FM Discuss] Recruiting more editors for book sprints

[tychoish]

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 12:34:32PM +0200, helen varley jamieson wrote:
> what is interesting for me is that the booksprint model breaks open
> traditional methods for book production and offers the possibility for
> different processes, according to the strengths of the collaborators. a
> key task of the facilitator is to observe the group then subtly or
> overtly get people to work on the particular things that they can do
> best. i've gone in to a sprint as a proofreader but ended up doing all
> kinds of other things as well, from structure & editing to writing. the
> combination of the need to just get stuck in & get the job done, along
> with the flexibility to put down one task & pick up another, means that
> you don't lose time struggling with something - you change to something
> you can do better and allow someone else to bring their perspective to
> whatever you were struggling with.

I'll want to actually have experience before I start commenting to
heavily, but I'd say "booksprint," as a method is what allows the
longer-than-wikipedia writing form to happen. Unless you have a bunch of
people going at full tilt, everyone increments rather than
generates. Typically the way that open source manuals happened otherwise
was that someone would write a decent draft and then it would get
edited slowly by a team. There aren't many in between options.

> this does result in a broad range of voices within one book, which isn't
> desirable according to traditional book production methods; but within a
> networked, open source environment, what it says to me is that this is a
> book that was created by a community & that has the richness of that
> community embedded within it. it's also never "finished" in the finite
> sense of traditional publishing; it can be updated and improved on an
> ongoing basis.

I mean, I don't actually think that's too revolutionary. I'm ripping
someone off, but I think books aren't finished just abandoned. Which
isn't to say that "conventional books," are never iterated or modified
after their initial publication, but there are differences.

When I read FM books, it's not multi-vocal in any substantial way. I
think what Andy is speaking to is that even though these books aren't
produced in the conventional sense. Editing, no matter who does it, is a
great thing.

> i think we will evolve new "roles" within the book sprint methodology &
> that at this stage it's important to be as open as possible about how it
> can be.

I guess it's less about learning what roles are and more about
understanding the book sprint process, understanding what makes one
"good," what makes one "great," and what doesn't work. In the mean time
FM has a lot to show for itself, and that's pretty cool.

Cheers,
sam

--
tycho(ish) @
garen at tychoish.com
http://tychoish.com/
"don't get it right, get it written" -- james thurber
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.flossmanuals.net/pipermail/discuss-flossmanuals.net/attachments/20111024/30d9a708/attachment.pgp>