WhoWeAre:Stage2Status/Fridemar
YES It is an honor to me, to be the second happy Yes-Voter in State 2 of the democratic process of identity forming of AboutUs.Org. As the list is meanwhile not anymore in the chronological order, I remember that Ward Cunningham was the first one, who was trustful and courageous enough to give his YES to the Mission and Vision of AboutUs.org. Although the formulation has changed over time, I still agree with the spirit of its current state and think, that this applies to all current YES-voters.
I feel fine with State 2, especially with the following component, which I complemented by "Initiating" and "Practising":
Transparency, Real People
- OpenBusiness processes
- WorkInPublic
So youll soon see another stage in my initiative for OpenBusiness, described by the following tags: SocialDomainTrading, literateMarketing, TransparentDomainPortfolios, DomainSharing, DomainPortfolioSharing, CollaborativeDomainDevelopement, DomainShareBartering, etc. , blogged as say-yes-to-aboutusorg-state-2.html on the SocialCommonWealth.Com
Fridemar, ' Kasey and I are attempting to remove "Initiating, Monitoring and Practicing OpenBusiness processes from the WhoWeAre page, but only want to do that if this concept is included in one or more values pages. We're read the Meatball pages on OpenBusiness and Hoofsmith and love what you've done with the WorkInPublic page, and are now wrestling with the OpenBusiness concept. What's the meta for OpenBusiness? Is that a branded term for this kind of doing work? Or is OpenBusiness itself the meta? What do you think? TedErnst (talk) 14:49, 5 November 2007 (PST)
- Thx Ted for the hint: So I streamlined my above text into OpenBusiness. It goes without saying for me, that only discussing the new paradigm of OpenBusiness (as aplying "radical transparency" to business-processes (to build online trust)) is not enough. We need prototypical projects. See my initiative DomainsToBeDeveloped.
Currently I am a lonely pioneer in the alpha state, a caller in the desert. I ask other peers to have the courage to open up their own DomainPortfolios in AboutUs, so that we can interact with LiterateDomainMarketing. A good example could be to initiate a project StocksAtHome.com, using similar distributed software as SetiAtHome.com, motivating programmers to start their job, by pledging them, say 50% of the sold involved domain-names, being paid by risk-capital entrepreneurs. OpenBusiness in this case would imply OpenMails to different programmers and entrepreneurs, perhaps even refining the concept by making explicit the necessary steps and showing and discussing the (OpenSource) resources and benefits for such an endeavour. The rest of the gain from selling StocksAtHome.com and similar domains could be divided between different promoting peers. Even the negotiation process of the partition of the profit could be done in public. OpenBusiness is the meta.
fridemar 14:00, 6 November 2007 (PST) SocialCommonWealth.com(perma-link)
- Fridemar, cool. I think it's clear that we (you and I, you and AboutUs, me and AboutUs) are kindred spirits. I'm comfortable using the term OpenBusiness as long as there's no expectation of some specific practice implied. We are attempting to be an open business, just so there's no confusion. We just don't want to be in a siguation where the definition of "OpenBusiness" is written elsewhere and then we're expected to somehow comply if we are to continue to use the term. You know what I mean? TedErnst (talk) 14:27, 6 November 2007 (PST)
- Ted, no problem. It's an evolutionary process. Every actor tries to manifest their idea of OpenBusiness. Chances are that the whole process converges to some more or less optimal form of a balance between openess and closedness. After all we have a skin, which offers such a balance :-)
fridemar 16:11, 6 November 2007 (PST)
Sounds great! Now to see if the others agree. -) TedErnst (talk) 16:48, 6 November 2007 (PST)
