Comments on: African Women and American Academics http://manypossibilities.net/2009/05/african-women-and-american-academics/ In the beginner's mind there are... Thu, 09 Sep 2010 04:48:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: Chelsea Larosa http://manypossibilities.net/2009/05/african-women-and-american-academics/comment-page-1/#comment-1250 Chelsea Larosa Thu, 18 Jun 2009 02:55:53 +0000 http://manypossibilities.net/?p=685#comment-1250 you are right Steve... comparison can bring out the truth. but not all the truths are out in the comparison. we must be then very careful in choosing and comparing. (www.kika.ca) you are right Steve… comparison can bring out the truth. but not all the truths are out in the comparison. we must be then very careful in choosing and comparing. (www.kika.ca)

]]> By: Steve Song http://manypossibilities.net/2009/05/african-women-and-american-academics/comment-page-1/#comment-1133 Steve Song Fri, 29 May 2009 06:58:04 +0000 http://manypossibilities.net/?p=685#comment-1133 Ironic that a both/and approach should apply to the very dichotomy proposed in the table. :-) I agree with you. I don't think it is one or the other particularly but I do believe seeking the truth in others as opposed to seeking what is broken as a general rule is more productive. Of course this has never stopped me from delivering a sharp verbal clip around the left ear in the past. It is more something I aspire to.<p> Since you bring up Open Source, a sage piece of advice I have seen given to Open Source projects is to always approve the first piece of code contribution from someone in the community no matter how bad it is. Rather help them fix it, build their confidence, and gain their participation allowing them to learn and develop their skills in the process. As opposed to simply rejecting the contribution based entirely on its merits and potentially dissuading them from contributing further.</p><p> Ben and Ros Zander's Art of Possibility chapter on "Being a Contribution" fits in here. Facilitator's Guide is in my library and your welcome to borrow it any time.</p> Ironic that a both/and approach should apply to the very dichotomy proposed in the table. :-) I agree with you. I don’t think it is one or the other particularly but I do believe seeking the truth in others as opposed to seeking what is broken as a general rule is more productive. Of course this has never stopped me from delivering a sharp verbal clip around the left ear in the past. It is more something I aspire to.

Since you bring up Open Source, a sage piece of advice I have seen given to Open Source projects is to always approve the first piece of code contribution from someone in the community no matter how bad it is. Rather help them fix it, build their confidence, and gain their participation allowing them to learn and develop their skills in the process. As opposed to simply rejecting the contribution based entirely on its merits and potentially dissuading them from contributing further.

Ben and Ros Zander’s Art of Possibility chapter on “Being a Contribution” fits in here. Facilitator’s Guide is in my library and your welcome to borrow it any time.

]]> By: philipp http://manypossibilities.net/2009/05/african-women-and-american-academics/comment-page-1/#comment-1132 philipp Fri, 29 May 2009 06:31:33 +0000 http://manypossibilities.net/?p=685#comment-1132 Interesting post Steve. The comparison table makes me wonder which model is used in open source communities. I suspect it has something to do with that balance between Popper and compassion (although it's a bit unfair to place him as the opposite of compassion). The first impression would be that open source has to be the Both/And model of decision making, because it's a volunteer community and it's all about "sharing". However, while the overall principle might be synthesis (combining lots of pieces of software into one application), the code development and selection process is more accurately described as survival of the fittest. Some might argue that the same applies to participation on developer mailing lists. It's a fascinating combination of the two. On one hand, you get the innovation edge that comes from competition of ideas - yet, there is an overall goal that trumps individual successes. Is the facilitation book in the Foundation library (yet)? Interesting post Steve. The comparison table makes me wonder which model is used in open source communities. I suspect it has something to do with that balance between Popper and compassion (although it’s a bit unfair to place him as the opposite of compassion).

The first impression would be that open source has to be the Both/And model of decision making, because it’s a volunteer community and it’s all about “sharing”. However, while the overall principle might be synthesis (combining lots of pieces of software into one application), the code development and selection process is more accurately described as survival of the fittest. Some might argue that the same applies to participation on developer mailing lists. It’s a fascinating combination of the two. On one hand, you get the innovation edge that comes from competition of ideas – yet, there is an overall goal that trumps individual successes.

Is the facilitation book in the Foundation library (yet)?

]]>