[Discuss] Community-based creation of Open Hardware Knowledge
nancy.ouyang at gmail.com
Fri Mar 13 03:59:04 UTC 2015
Yea -- here's a proposal in more detail --
noobuser: "what is CAD"
expertA: "claims" the post.
has five-minute window to write the skeleton for a well-designed answer.
editing window immediately visible to world, but only expertA can write to
meanwhile, other interested people "tag" onto the post.
after five minutes, editing window becomes write-able to maximum 5 people
who tagged onto the post.
they flesh out a v0.1 of the answer together using a real-time
collaborative text editor, like etherpad/google docs hybrid.
editing window visible to world the whole time. 
after one hour, v0.1 "published." when this happens,
a) anyone can upvote the "published" post now. upvotes are distributed
evenly to these 6 people.
b) also now anyone in the world (randomexpertA) can contribute to v0.2 and
also give +1/-1. if enough +1s accumulate, expertA is notified. if
randomexpertA'a contributions are merged to "published" version by expertA
(maybe "tag" editors also have admin power to prevent maintainer-leaving
rot), randomexpertA gets to share in the upvotes on the answer.
---> we need to think about how to deal with answers becoming obsolete as
technology changes. pruning? all answers older than 1 year are axed (users
retain their upvotes) automatically, unless saved by a yearly review
 heehee, with all this real-time documentation going on, maybe one day
we will have a "twitch" for documentation writing :P cheer on your favorite
doc writer as he/she heroically distributes knowledge to the world!
Re: timofonic, you might like this post
> What software exists to aid in explaining electromechanical concepts?
this is like... we need another unconference to have people think about
"software tools for documentation for hardware concepts"... ideally
easily-available software tools, not MATLAB/Simulink... biostar, not
sigh. my brain is going to explode soon =/ but thanks everyone for thinking
through these things and being excited with me
narwhaledu.com, educational robots <http://gfycat.com/ExcitableLeanAkitainu>
[[<(._.)>]] my personal blog <http://www.orangenarwhals.com>,
arvados.org (open source software for provenance, reproducing, and scaling
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:21 PM, Matt Maier <blueback09 at gmail.com> wrote:
> That's an interesting approach. So, somebody (preferably an expert) would
> control the repo for the answer and then everyone else would contribute and
> vote on changes. Is that accurate?
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 7:27 PM, Nancy Ouyang <nancy.ouyang at gmail.com>
>> re: "how to mobilize a community to create knowledge"
>> (Moving to new thread, this is a whole 'nother can of worms)...
>> Some notes (from a discussion today with a friend)
>> - Yahoo answers is a steaming pile of -- err dung
>> - Stack Overflow is better, but is still shockingly bad
>> - their reward mechanism encourages participation, but does not
>> correlate with expertise and helpfulness well
>> - quora suffers from the same sickness as reddit
>> - it has turned into storytelling somewhat
>> - more like TED than expertise driven
>> - it creates a positive feedback of popularity
>> - a well-regarded story will dominate all others
>> - wikipedia does alright
>> - they compile knowledge into a single answer, rather than
>> selecting the best answer
>> *Given that, here's an idea*
>> - *stackoverflow but with git merge of answers*
>> - the merged answer gives points to all contributors fairly somehow
>> - people upvote / downvote changes, ala Apache +1/-1 +0/-0
>> - See
>> for explanation
>> - and there's a mechanism to allow comments that are not part of
>> the answer
>> Does this flag anyone as "this will fail for obvious reasons"?
>> If not, we could flesh this out further and then feature request this on
>> the Biostars github <https://github.com/ialbert/biostar-central> and
>> maybe someone will actually build it... potentially on a fork or something,
>> since there's something to be said for real-time help with a community
>> welcoming to "beginner questions," instead of technical manual or textbook,
>> no matter how well-written.
>>> *Biostar: Software for building Scientific Communities*
>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 10:02 PM, timofonic timofonic <
>> timofonic at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hello, Nancy.
>>> Wikibooks are great, but those documents aren't nearly as didactical and
>>> easier to read than these copyrighted works. Despite they aren't perfect
>>> and offer simplifications I don't get (I did read a free chapter from the
>>> author on Usenet about getting LT3086 from Linear Technology to make an
>>> adjustable power supply. Its okay, but those are expensive chips and I
>>> would prefer to use discrete electronics), they are easy to read.
>>> I understand writing proper books about electronics or any other
>>> technical stuff without being boring, having good/excellent writing, proper
>>> design and great explainings (so people without proper physics and/or maths
>>> are able to understand it and learn that missing stuff) is a total
>>> challenge and it would require a totally dedicated team of people. After
>>> all Newnes, Cambridge Press and others have tons of money to invest in
>>> writers, graphic artists (okay they are from India and cheap labor, but
>>> still too much to pay) and scientific people fixing the texts. I'm still
>>> not sure if the same QA could be done in a Wiki way, without a strong
>>> project management.
>>> Another idea I had is about didactical games for learning the core
>>> concepts to practical exercises without getting boring. I would like some
>>> kind of mix between "There are no electrons" from Kenn Amdahl, Cisco Binary
>>> Game, the best humour from classic adventure games (Lucas Arts, Sierra and
>>> such) with some kind of adult but not stupid twist, Forrest Mims way, from
>>> basic to intermediate about electronics (like in Art of Electronics) and
>>> interactive exercises from all topics. But that would require a big team of
>>> very dedicated people, a
>>> game aimed to adults is a very difficult challenge, I think.
>>>> Re: open books, http://en.wikibooks.org/
>>>> narwhaledu.com, educational robots
>>>> <http://gfycat.com/ExcitableLeanAkitainu> [[<(._.)>]] my personal blog
>>>> <http://www.orangenarwhals.com>, orangenarwhals
>>>> arvados.org (open source software for provenance, reproducing, and
>>>> scaling your analyses)
>>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:06 AM, Timofonic <timofonic at gmail.com>
>>>>> I'm new at electronics, but I was thinking about it.
>>>>> I have some questions about Free/Open Hardware, maybe even full of
>>>>> radical thinking:
>>>>> - What about Free/Open Hardware from the ground up? High quality open
>>>>> learning material:
>>>>> --Open Books: different levels from basic for children (no idea about
>>>>> available material, sorry) and adults such as works from Forrest Mims to
>>>>> complete (think of something like Art of Electronics and Practical
>>>>> Electronics for Inventors) and advanced, organize translations , didactical
>>>>> games even for adults but not dummy ones, practices, volunteering tutors
>>>>> for learning aid to people interested on Free/Open hardware but having
>>>>> issues with the learning process and collaboration with learning centers
>>>>> (schools, colleges, vocational training schools, universities...).
>>>>> Kind regards.
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the discuss