More Leaders Needed!
Join LibraryThing to post.
This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
As I posted on the OSC process thread:
Greetings! We have been discussing solutions to some of the problems we have been having with the OSC process as it develops and evolves.
Our proposed solutions fall into two categories. First, the facilitators (Laena & David) need to do a better job communicating where we are at and how decisions get made. This is hard because all of the forum threads are so active and we have very full time jobs. So, in order to do that, some participants of the project need to take on more responsibility to monitor and summarize the discussions. As the project has grown in size and complexity, two people alone cannot guide this ship!
Here are some of our specific proposed changes based on feed back:
1. Create a blog separate from LibraryThing. Done: http://openshelvesclassification.blogspot.com. This will serve as our one stop information and decision clearinghouse.
2. Before changes are made to the levels or scope notes, someone will post a summary of the pros and cons based on the conversation in the threads and what the perceived consensus is. This will give members a chance to discuss a specific change before it goes into effect.
3. The blog will also be where Laena, David, and others can talk about the work going on obtaining and testing public library data.
4. We need help monitoring threads and organizing data. This is where people willing to take on more of a role in guiding the project come in. Each top level thread needs to will have a dedicated monitor. There are 42 top levels, with sometimes more than one thread for each.
5. The monitor serves as guide. The person will monitor the discussions in the forum and track what specific changes are proposed. When consensus seems to have emerged, the monitor will summarize the discussion surrounding the change on the blog and state what the proposed change will be.
We hope this process will produce greater transparency and more clear communication between contributors. It will also enable new people to enter the process in a more seamless manor.
Please let us know if you would be interested in monitoring a thread. 8 library science graduate students have already stepped up and offered to help us, but we need 35 more people to volunteer. Check out the blog to see which top levels still need to have monitors.
I can only manage one, but I can step up for Autobio/Bio category (it's one I've been posting to so it makes sense). Also, if you'd like someone to keep an eye on the 'Things that don't seem to have a place at top-level' thread (which I think also makes sense), also happy to pitch in there.
This is a step in the right direction, I think, but I remain concerned because many of us who have participated and been the most vocal in the forums so far have strong viewpoints that we don't necessarily want to silence--and we would probably have to do so (at least to a considerable degree) if we were to serve as leaders and moderators. If the second-level categories are going to come together, the OSC definitely needs more leaders, as this post suggests, and I hope you're able to find them. But for myself, I think my place is to participate in the debate, and not to moderate it.
I'd be willing to take Music, if no one with more (aka any) library background steps up. Although I'm not sure that that category can progress any further without librarian input.
Thanks klarusu and comfypants. I have you down for Autobio/Bio and Music respectively. When you have a moment, send me your emails at dconner3 AT gmail DOT com and I will invite you so you can edit the blog.
This topic is not marked as primarily about any work, author or other topic.