Rococo: Rencontres sur la Collaboration, la Créativité et l'Autogestion

Rococo Camp, also known as RecentChanges (as in wiki change history) Camp, happened in Montreal, Canada May 18-21. The format was Open Space which was very fitting given the topic of collaborative technologies, with a focus on wikis. I wasn't quite expecting so many topics raised by participants to be on wikis, but still it was an excellent opportunity to learn what others in the wiki realm were up to.

I was the only one from the international development sector present, but I had to raise the following topic: Web 2.0 (Participatory/Centralized Services) for (Socio-Economic) International Development - What are the wins, what are the losses? as it has been a topic occupying my thoughts of late.

Continue reading "Rococo: Rencontres sur la Collaboration, la Créativité et l'Autogestion"

Posted by Sarah Kerr in Open Development at 22:28 | Comments (0) | Trackbacks (0)
NetSquared Conference: remixing the web for social change
Open Development
copyright: http://www.flickr.com/photos/roland/ under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ license Although the conference format didn't allow for the depth of dialogue and learning which I was hoping to come away with, I found NetSquared (May 29-30, San José, CA, USA) was valuable with a dash of a missed opportunity for Dgroups. I met many people with whom i've communicated online, caught up with ones I did know and sometimes stumbled with explaining Bellanet as we are evolving within IDRC.

The conference focussed on supporting 21 “social web for social change” projects which were voted in by the public (and NetSquared community) as the top favourite projects from a large pool (including Dgroups 2.0 which unfortunately didn't make the top 21). The projects were examined and received support from participants through three “tracks”: social impact, economic sustainability and technical innovation. We then voted at the end and the top 3 received more of the 100 000 USD than the others. (Tangent: I have yet to be a fan of “tracks” as more often than not, the discussion goes off-”track” and there are too many overlaps between the tracks (therefore, the track notion should be questioned). Tracks are taxonomy.) The 21 projects however receive more than financial support, through project champions and mentors which I think is an interesting model, especially for the projects which are new and getting off the ground.

[Posted by Sarah Kerr]