Jeai! We are making progress. I will later copy all of our suggestions so far into one Wiki here for us to edit. But here are my 5 cents on the META stuff.
##Name
The ideas for a name i found was:
- Open Source Circular Economy FUTURE List
- Open Source Circular Economy WISH list
- The Open Source Circular Economy List
##Intro Text
Here is a draft for the intro text. PAD LINK
##On the bullet points
We have 2 different types of suggestions for bullet points now. We have something very concrete like:
„biodegradable inks“
And some stuff is pretty meta or philosophical like:
„how will work, employment and income change in OSCE“
I think we should be clear about which is the way to go and the question for this: What is the purpose of this list. And what are propper crafted bullet points then. Here is how I see it:
###Concrete questions to trigger concrete projects
For me the goal is to inspire people for new and practical experiments and projects. Therefor it should be stuff they can really control and get their hands on. So as concrete as possible would be good.
###Be open about specific technologies
By coming up with my bullet points (in the wiki below) I saw, that many of the points I thought about were already up for debate or a political decision. For example it is clear we want to have renewable energy. But what is the right way to go here? Decentralized solutions (everyone has a battery in his house) or centralized solutions (that might be easier to maintain and recycle and consume less materials). You can argue about this question for hours without a clear outcome … should we make the decisions.
We will not be able to avoid this in every point, but we should be sensitive about the problem.
###To inspire!
Maybe that could be a general rule when to decide if something should go on the list or not: Can we (or some of us) imagine, that this bullet point inspires the creation of a practical project in the context of a hackathon or challenge?
Let’s try to craft the points like this. My suggestion for example would be not to call it: „Create modular electronics that allow…“ but „Create a modular vacuum cleaner that allow…“ -> A toaster is more concrete – the task is more concrete. And people are not stupid. They will know, that a „modular dish washer“ is equally good. But when they decide to create a modular „dish washer“ – this is their own idea. And people love to follow their own ideas. With this little trick we are more concrete and allow more imagination at the same time.
##Adding Guidelines?
Jaime added the suggestion that we could add Guidelines to the list with requirements like „durable“ or „cost-effective“.
If we decide that the main purpose of the list should be to inspire people to START new practical projects I would suggest to have no further Guidelines on the list. Because:
- Reality slows down imagination, and how could a new project deliver on that imediately?
- People will ask themselve these questions about their projects anyway at some point.
- Some points already make somehow a suggestion about what is the right way to go for a CE - beeing „cost-effective“ (might be seen as „the logic of capitalism”) or “durable” or “modular” – maybe we find out, this is not the best way for a CE at least not for all stuff.
- Inspiration is thinking yourself, not read other peoples thoughts. The shorter we can make the text around the bullet points (that also should be limited) the better.
(Ok, I will copy all suggestions made so far together in one topic and add mine and let’s see how it looks like.) If you have more just post them.
@Silvia @Gien @sharmarval @Jaime
