This is a follow-up to the Digital Britian Glasgow Unconference last night. I’m going tangential and talking about the disconnected groups that are the Scottish digital community and the issue of disparity between multiple sources of information that create confusion and duplication of effort. I also present a proposal for a solution that centralises metadata about groups, communities and events without hijacking the valid conversations that already exist about them elsewhere.
Sorry for the um, and errs, but I’m sort of just winging this as I go.
Your opinions?
Check out Sarah Drummond’s blog for a breakdown of the real issues from the unconference.
Update. I commented this response on Ross McCulloch’s blog.
I think what I’ve proposed with aggregation is a solution to this so called problem with disconnection and disparity, but it’s by no means a platform for action. All it would do is allow people with interest in a certain topic to find others who are already thinking and working in that field.
Although in my opinion, that’s enough.
I don’t think we should be looking at what we can add in terms of hubs and platforms, but ask what we can take away. Let’s remove valueless obsfucation and let people connect themselves together and collaborate on top of what’s already out there.
A new professional group may try and build it’s own platform and hub, no doubt sub-optimally and without proper user research, with the main objective behind it being to raise subscription revenue and look cool slick doing it (seriously).
Yes, what I propose could be included within the remit of professional group. Yet the issue with a ‘digital’ professional group is that it would have too many sub-professions to support, most of which are already well supported. Designers have D&AD, I’m a member of the IAI, usability specialists have the UPA, etc. I don’t see how a new group could do a good enough job for each profession to convince people to reach into their pockets. Actually I’ll get real and answer that now, they couldn’t (never give an option where an opinion will suffice).
So. If what I proposed is more fully considered in time, how would we move forward. Start talking about it, get out the thick markers and sketch it down, and keep adding fidelity to the concept as the research rolls in. That’s how I see it from my UX design perspective. I’m really interested in hearing what others have to say from their perspectives.
