Comments on: “Go to Wikipedia and press ‘edit’” http://socialsoftware.org/go-to-wikipedia-and-change-something/ Mon, 26 Jul 2010 17:36:35 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: berthastrik http://socialsoftware.org/go-to-wikipedia-and-change-something/comment-page-1/#comment-79 berthastrik Sat, 19 Dec 2009 14:18:30 +0000 http://socialsoftware.org/?p=71#comment-79 hello everybody I am very glad to come here <a href="http://mooivrouw.gallerysblogs.com/" rel="nofollow">photo</a> hello everybody

I am very glad to come here

photo

]]> By: Davide 'Folletto' Casali http://socialsoftware.org/go-to-wikipedia-and-change-something/comment-page-1/#comment-70 Davide 'Folletto' Casali Sun, 29 Nov 2009 14:02:29 +0000 http://socialsoftware.org/?p=71#comment-70 Art was lucky: he found the right key to show it to him and at the same time he was enough open-minded to get it at the first try. ;) However, the point you're making here is true: we need often to make a step backward and try to see how the technology looks from the eyes of someone not already immersed in it. About this I find interesting to look someone teaching an elder one (often, not too much elder! Even a 50-years-old person is more than enough) since the two mental models are completely different and it's nice to see how the two interact to try to find some kind of common ground. Art was lucky: he found the right key to show it to him and at the same time he was enough open-minded to get it at the first try. ;)

However, the point you’re making here is true: we need often to make a step backward and try to see how the technology looks from the eyes of someone not already immersed in it.

About this I find interesting to look someone teaching an elder one (often, not too much elder! Even a 50-years-old person is more than enough) since the two mental models are completely different and it’s nice to see how the two interact to try to find some kind of common ground.

]]> By: EphraimJF http://socialsoftware.org/go-to-wikipedia-and-change-something/comment-page-1/#comment-52 EphraimJF Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:19:16 +0000 http://socialsoftware.org/?p=71#comment-52 I think social software simply represents the evolution of computer technology towards better replicating real world interaction. Wikis, discussion forums, profile pages, Google Wave, Enterprise 2.0: It all represents a step forward in technology being like the conference room, water cooler, dinner table or beer keg. I think social software simply represents the evolution of computer technology towards better replicating real world interaction.

Wikis, discussion forums, profile pages, Google Wave, Enterprise 2.0: It all represents a step forward in technology being like the conference room, water cooler, dinner table or beer keg.

]]> By: Bevin http://socialsoftware.org/go-to-wikipedia-and-change-something/comment-page-1/#comment-43 Bevin Sun, 08 Nov 2009 01:38:41 +0000 http://socialsoftware.org/?p=71#comment-43 "Social software paradoxically wants to fit into existing cultural norms while breaking rules about what’s possible. " I think it's a platitude for getting people "in" while trying to continue to move the envelope forward. If you were to say "Social software has the potential to change your organization by allowing employees to organize however they choose, perhaps deciding that you, management, is irrelevant, connecting with each other to gather that knowledge that you currently hold so dear...." well, conversations like that don't really get very far. It's going to take awhile for work to change. Look at how long it took for email to be a primary mode of conversation from the time it arrived to the time of adoption. Then think about how long it's going to take to shake the model of the industrial revolution...we've had it for hundreds of years. Social software can enable it, but it won't do it alone miraculously, and those who attempt to get it into the organization must be aware of sounding fan-boi-ish...that will just scare those for whom knowledge, and the sole possession of such, is power. “Social software paradoxically wants to fit into existing cultural norms while breaking rules about what’s possible. ”

I think it’s a platitude for getting people “in” while trying to continue to move the envelope forward. If you were to say “Social software has the potential to change your organization by allowing employees to organize however they choose, perhaps deciding that you, management, is irrelevant, connecting with each other to gather that knowledge that you currently hold so dear….” well, conversations like that don’t really get very far.

It’s going to take awhile for work to change. Look at how long it took for email to be a primary mode of conversation from the time it arrived to the time of adoption. Then think about how long it’s going to take to shake the model of the industrial revolution…we’ve had it for hundreds of years.

Social software can enable it, but it won’t do it alone miraculously, and those who attempt to get it into the organization must be aware of sounding fan-boi-ish…that will just scare those for whom knowledge, and the sole possession of such, is power.

]]>