HomePage RecentChanges Discussion

This wiki was last modified more than half a year ago and will be deleted eventually!

OrganizedInquiryDiscussionArchive

OrganizedInquiryHub | OrganizedInquiryDiscussionArchiveB >


An archive of the discussion that led to the content on the local page OrganizedInquiry

(from 2007-02-23)

There was an exchange between KeithHopper and LionKimbro on AboutInquiry a while back, that is very related to CollectiveProblemSolving.

The idea that LionKimbro seemed to be alluding to was sort of a InquiryNetwork?, weaving together many different groups and communities to follow an inquiry process over a substantial period of time.

This is an idea that I’d like to explore, too, and I think that CollectiveProblemSolving is the place to do it.

I’ve seen some recent activity in this area, like DroppingKnowledge? (http://www.droppingknowledge.org/).

Also, KeithHopper mentioned on AboutInquiry, the idea of from WisdomOfCrowds?, that you can AggregateKnowledge?. One way that people are doing this is with PredictionMarkets.

There is a difference between the WisdomOfCrowds? and CollectiveIntelligence:

http://socialsynergy.typepad.com/social_synergy/2006/12/wisdom_of_crowd.html

One idea I have been thinking about is to carry on a multi community inquiry using both CollectiveIntelligence, and the WisdomOfCrowds?.

So, working with blogs and wikis and PredictionMarkets, and other mediums. – SamRose

The other page, I think, was OrganizedInquiry. I’m happy to discuss it here! Feel free to copy it here, if you like, or just make a local version.

LionKimbro

Lion, yes! OrganizedInquiry was it!

I am personally very committed to enacting and supporting this idea over time, it is very much in sync with some ideas that I have thrown out there, but that never gained a lot of traction on their own.

Here’s an idea:

How individuals and communities can contribute: CollectiveIntelligence branch of Inquiry

This branch is where exploration, discussion, and knowledge creation is done in the open, and thus can be influenced by group pressures. But, group approval, and recognition for usefulness of contribution is a reward, generally.

On the OrganizedInquiry wiki itself, designated summarizing people, and anyone else interested, are then summarizing all of that into a page or pages about the inquiry.

How individuals and communities can contribute: WisdomOfCrowds branch of Inquiry

This branch is intended to make group pressure less of a factor, and is intended to effectively aggregate the knowledge of a diverse group of individuals who are generally working seperately. There may be some connection, but individuals may remain anonymous here. Anonymity is not always possible in the CollectiveIntelligence branch.

So, curious to see what others think about all of this. The idea is to develop techniques to systematically incorporate all of this.

Integrating, Aggregating, Making it Useful

Wikis, Tings, talks, discussions etc, between the team of people who aggregate it all. They will likely develop processes. A wiki page can link to all of the sources, to tie them all together. People can continue to grow an inquiry over time, in an ongoing way, from all sources. Although it will likely get disjointed if it is not tended to. Eventually, it might become possible to make the growing more cybernetic. – SamRose (did TransClusion of this page to OrganizedInquiry discussion, just in case anyone comes across and is interested in this)

Discussion

I share the enthusiasm, and I have a ton of ideas: establishing code-points for questions, for cross-comparison, generating maps of discussions and discussion points, for cross-comparison, standardizing languages.

But I want to ask:

I can contribute an hour a day (or more) to this discussion, but I want to know something about what we’re doing.

LionKimbro

Here are my own thoughts on the above questions:

“What question are we answering?”

To play Jeopardy: “What interesting ideas have we collected so far, about OrganizedInquiry?” I feel like we come with these bags of ideas, and we’re putting them on the table, trying to figure out how to put them together, and so on.

“What are we trying to do here?”

I think this is unanswered at the moment. For myself, I think I’m asking, “What could we do here?”

“What should we be asking ourselves now?”

I don’t know; At the spur of the moment, I’m thinking: “What can we do here, with limited time commitment?” I think there are some things we could do here– I think we could perform a miniature inquiry here, and get something interesting and useful out of it. Perhaps we could make an inquiry around: “What is the territory of Organized Inquiry? What are the kinds of questions that are addressed, when people perform an organized inquiry? What kinds of organized inquiries are we interested in, and not interested in? What are the ideas that are considered, when considering organized inquiry?” This is something I think we could make some rough maps on, and that could be useful to people who follow in interest, after our wills have moved us to something else.

Jeapordy again, on the above – so it was: “What can we do here, with limited time commitment?” What other answers to that question are there?

“What is trying to emerge here, and what is it within our capacity to bring it out?”

Ah, the question of capacity strikes again. I think what is trying to emerge here is “Organized Inquiry,” so that people can come together, and discover new things and advance the art, building deeper answers than surface q-a, responding-to-immediate news, produces. So that we can really collect intelligence and so on.

So, in a paragraph summary:

Lion asks, “What can we usefully do here, with limited time commitment?”, and Lion offers up “Construct a map of ideas and questions,” as a possibility.

LionKimbro

I have another idea - instead of querrying everyone and then aggregating the answers how about using the software for intelligently dispaching the questions to people who are likely to know the answers. Or even to create some real time brainstorming sessions between the right persons? – ZbigniewLukasiak

Zby: I think that in the short term, that just to demonstrate the validity of OrganizedInquiry, it will be mostly manual. But, your suggestion seems like a logical next step, for sure.

Lion: I agree, let’s construct the map of ideas and questions.

So, maybe there are (feel free to refactor):

Maps

Question Map

MetaQuestion

IntraGroup Questions (questions for our group here and now)

About OrganizedInquiry:Idea Map

Idea Map

Automating the processes

Tying together many groups/communities/individuals

How individuals and communities can contribute: CollectiveIntelligence branch of Inquiry

This branch is where exploration, discussion, and knowledge creation is done in the open, and thus can be influenced by group pressures. But, group approval, and recognition for usefulness of contribution is a reward, generally.

On the OrganizedInquiry wiki itself, designated summarizing people, and anyone else interested, are then summarizing all of that into a page or pages about the inquiry.

How individuals and communities can contribute: WisdomOfCrowds branch of Inquiry

This branch is intended to make group pressure less of a factor, and is intended to effectively aggregate the knowledge of a diverse group of individuals who are generally working seperately. There may be some connection, but individuals may remain anonymous here. Anonymity is not always possible in the CollectiveIntelligence branch.

So, curious to see what others think about all of this. The idea is to develop techniques to systematically incorporate all of this.

Integrating, Aggregating, Making it Useful

Wikis, Tings, talks, discussions etc, between the team of people who aggregate it all. They will likely develop processes. A wiki page can link to all of the sources, to tie them all together. People can continue to grow an inquiry over time, in an ongoing way, from all sources. Although it will likely get disjointed if it is not tended to. Eventually, it might become possible to make the growing more cybernetic. – SamRose (did TransClusion of this page to OrganizedInquiry discussion, just in case anyone comes across and is interested in this) – SamRose


That is just my quick attempt to start a map that we can move elsewhere. Don’t hesitate to edit it mercilessly (or get rid of it), if the spirit moves you to do so :) Mostly, I am just try to break my bad habit of just leaving comments in our wiki communities, and trying to make my comments somehow useful towards DocumentMode pages. – SamRose

I’d like to propose:

I nominate Sam Rose to be the PageMaintainer, and to facilitate the inquiry, though I’d be happy with any of us who do this. SamRose started this page though, and he’s clearly passionate about this.

We may want to articulate a little more on: “What are some specific artifacts we might like to see come out of this?”

I’d like to write a little more on that, specifically, in a bit here. (Sakura just got home, though, and is begging me to play Wii tennis with her.) :)


Wow - I’m trying to digest all of this. A sample inquiry might be the best approach. Perhaps we can do a simple/sample inquiry around an unrelated topic (geese, wii tennis, alarm clocks, whatever) so that our terminology doesn’t get muddled with our analysis. Reading the above info, frankly, is a bit of a mind-bender. As we begin to explore, we can recommend different methods in-context (as sideline comments) for addressing the inquiry (e.g. here’s a great place for prediction markets!)

- KeithHopper

Lion, I am multi-tasking on a bunch of stuff today, including this. But just wanted to pop in and say yes, I will definitely be PageMaintainer, will definitely move to local OrganizedInquiry, and will definitely work in everyone’s input. And, I think the timeline is good, too. Maybe once we answer our questions, and map this out a bit, then we can add some ProjectManagement -style info to the page for our small scale testing, like we are testing, possibly declaring milestones, who’s involved, etc.? It won’t break my heart if don’t do that, of course. But, I am just thinking about this in terms of how a new person coming along might engage or help this out, or a least easily understand where we are in our processes.

Anyway, Lion, for what you write above, yes indeed, I am working on that immediately.

Kieth, yes, you’re right, we’ll probably have to reel it in a bit, and progress in steps that we can test as we go. Start out with something that we can do here and now, as Lion’s suggested. Will update soon. – SamRose


OrganizedInquiryHub | OrganizedInquiryDiscussionArchiveB >

EditNearLinks: ProjectManagement PageMaintainer AboutInquiry DocumentMode DelphiMethod TransClusion ZbigniewLukasiak OpenSource CollectiveIntelligence