Talk:Community/6x10000s Problem
perhaps archive.org would extend their archive to cover objects? they have already taken the leap into seeing digital information as something to archive under their charter.
Yup, they're good people and 'projects, parts, arts, and docs' fall under their charter. I want them to be the secondary mirror of everything on RepRap.org, rather than for-profit websites-of-the-month. But RepRap.org doesn't need more outgoing links right now.
On RepRap.org, it's our role to host, curate, steward, and administrate the RepRap community's instructions for projects, parts and their metadata: verbal and computer instructions (files), photoessays, and community/energy (chat, eyeballs) etc. perfectly and uniquely bonded and organized. Or RepRap.org as instructions and as users, starts to evaporate into a frustrating mess of outgoing links. Again. (Exhibit A: http://blog.reprap.org)
Also, they don't exploit strong social networking principles like youtube or Zach-the-RRRF-guy's site do. We need to operate using strong social networking principles in order to motivate contributions. Community motivates contribution, and contribution motivates community. By accidentally forking contributions, Zach et. al. have accidentally forked the community. And vice versa. Cleaning that up is our job. :D
I do want Archive.org contributing to our Policy and helping us with software and server infrastructure because they're great people who do good work.
Very much best to discuss it in Library Administration, Announcements, and Policy and keep our notes on Library/6x10000s Problem. Otherwise, the conversation starts to fork. So please start a new thread quoting this, and we can thoughtfully hash it out in the open. Because that's what we do with Library Policy matters. (and maybe wipe the "discussion" page, replacing it with a link to your new "Library/6x10000s Problem" thread, once you create it.)--Sebastien Bailard 22:41, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
