Stick in the Mud?
March 11, 2008
At the moment I’m feeling a bit of malaise and that might be due to any number of things. Caffeine deficiency (remedying that with a café au lait as we speak - thanks, Sylvain and Moe, for the idea), a lack of sun and physical activity (Did I really expect I would be cycling to work every day here in Quebec City in winter?). And like any good malaise, it is colouring my perception of everything I am involved in from work, to my attempts at learning French, right up to this podcast project. And so, I ask you all, dear readers and listeners, and especially contributors and potential contributors, to bear that in mind as you read the rest of this entry.
The Talking Stick podcast isn’t really going exactly the way I had hoped. Not in terms of the content - the contributions have been spectacular. But more like the lack of content. While there has been a great deal of enthusiasm by some, and no shortage of members in the contibutors’ group, the contributions are not coming in as I had expected. Some episodes have been started and fizzled out (so far), while others spend weeks with each contributor. (Before you contributors start sending me hate mail - I do realize you have lives. This is me saying not “you suck” but “Hmmm - my expectations and reality are not matching. I wonder how to make this different.” which may well result in my changing those expectations because they are unrealistic). I had also hoped to see more people starting their own threads but there have been only a couple of those so far.
I realized as I was thinking about this that much of the issue may well have to do with the fact that there’s a lot of general confusion in the group as to what it is we’re actually doing and how we’re doing it. There are still people who are unclear as to how the process works, what the rules are, and the logistics. And I realized, that aside from a relatively incoherent facebook message to a handful of you, I never really shared my vision for what this would be and how it would work.
So the story goes like this. Back in November I was at Uncommon Grounds, a cool little café in the west end of Toronto where some folks were talking about the environment. I couldn’t help but interject (and people who have met me will be shocked as in groups I am rarely one to talk at all with people I KNOW let alone total strangers. So anyway we got to chatting for a while and one of the people at the table enthusiastically mentioned that he’d love to make a podcast where people just met in the café and talked about a particular subject. The podcast would be edited minimally and posted as-is. By the end of the conversation we were pretty excited - they didn’t have any recording equipment, we had an H4 and the knowhow. I passed on my email address and waited for the podcasting to begin. And you guessed it. Nothing happened. I never heard a thing, didn’t have an address to respond to and so it ended there. Except now here I was with all this excitment about an idea that wasn’t going to even happen. (more crass readers can insert the appropriate metaphor here) And then it occurred to me: I didn’t have to do this with that group of people. I could tap into a group of people who I knew had interesting things to say.
Background bit number two (believe me, there is a point to this). While Sage and I were living at the yurt I became very interested in egalitarian intentional communities. I loved the idea behind the lack of hierarchy and the building of consensus in order to make decisions. In fact, had things played out only slightly differently, the Quirky Nomads podcast would probably be being recorded as we speak in a commune in the Ozarks.
The two ideas combined have brought me to where we are today. I have this idea for a podcast in which everyone participates on equal ground. There is no leader, though some seem to think I am, I really am not fond of that “position” - I’m the guy who edits the podcasts, starts and contributes to episodes just like anyone else. I am also the one who occasionally bugs you if you are late with your audio but really I even hate that part as I understand how life happens and people have their issues to deal with and really don’t need to be bugged about the audio they’re late with. That’s what happens at day jobs and that’s what I’m trying to avoid here. Really, if I could set up an automated reminder to do it for me I’d be eternally grateful as receiving a notification from a computer saying “oops did you forget” conveys nothing unintended emotionally.
But I’m getting off the subject. I’m writing this because I am stuck. I have some ideas and I am not really sure how to turn them into reality because I am running into a number of roadblocks. While in my work life (and even in my non-work life as Sage will attest) I am the one who figures out stuff like this, I am at a loss. Any assistance you can give will help tremendously.
Problem number one: Participation, or lack thereof. At the moment I have 34 contributors in the group (and would love more) but as yet have 4 episodes underway. I had originally hoped to have an addition to each episode once per week or two at the most but some are really languishing for weeks with one episode having been started in mid-December. If we got back on track and people were punctual with contributions we’d have about a month before we’re tapped dry. Really to make a weekly podcast (is this even attainable here?) someone needs to start a new thread every week. I can’t do this myself, and really I don’t want to. I like the fact that different participants give a different flavour to the episodes. So the take-away question here is: How do we start and keep content flowing?
Problem number two: There seems to be lack of clarity in the “rules”. Probably this is due largely to the fact that I haven’t clearly defined them and at the beginning that was intentional. I don’t really want to stifle creativity. If I say “No episodes over 20 min” or “please talk for 3-5 minutes per subject” I think I would lose a lot. Like it or not, most of us were educated in schools where an authority figure dictated how we were to create and some of us continue to work in environs where our creativity is assigned to us on sometimes a daily basis. I feel like maybe I’ve tossed a bunch of art supplies a room and said “Here are some great supplies. Everyone work together and make something really cool.” But maybe I need to say “Here are some cool art supplies. Make something on a 9 x 12 canvas that describes how you feel right this minute.” While avoiding going so far as “Here is a piece of paper and some crayons. Everyone draw a picture of Montreal.” Take away question here is: Is the lack of “rules and an authority figure preventing people from participating? If so, do we need rules, then?
Problem number three: Technology is being a royal pain in the ass. Everyone is really social-networked out. Finding a platform for everyone to work and participate in has been a process and I’ve already changed it once. Facebook worked great at first but provided no facility for uploading content, no good means for letting people know when discussion threads were being responded to, and a platform that for privacy reasons many potential contributors were opposed to joining. Ning was a good solution but has been of limited use probably because for many contributors on facebook, they aren’t checking ning all the time. Question here: Are we using the right platform for our collaboration?
Problem number four: Uploading and passing the stick. I think if ning is the right platform and starts being used this might be solved by the file attachment thing and simply notifying others that it is their turn. Question: Anyone have any good ideas for handling transferring files?
Final Problem (I’ve ranted enough): More of a question. Is the format working for you? Does the “one person starts” followed by another who passes it on to someone they choose and so forth working in your opinion? There are some who are concerned that it might result in some exclusion of others, and in some cases it might lead to certain people being chosen over others. Question: Is there another method (free for all: “I just recorded this - eveyrone respond who has an opinion, for example) that would work better in your opinion?
So I’ve just ranted at you for about an hour (by my clock) about what I think isn’t working. However, the reason I am writing this at all is that I am frustrated because the content that has come out has been so good, I don’t want to see the whole group of us podfade. I mean really - 34 people folks! There must be 3-5 of you inspired enough at any one time to make an episode happen in the course of 4-6 weeks, yes?
So let me close with what is my vision for this since I realize I never actually shared it with anyone:
In my life I am a problem solver and an enabler. In many cases (both at work and at home) I come up with ideas and then other people either help me develop them or develop them themselves without me involved. I want to see this become the same sort of thing. I want to see this become a community run egalitarian podcast that follows the whim of the masses. In an ideal world, much of the stick passing (hell, even the editing would be automated or even taken on in a rotating basis. Perhaps the person who comes up with the idea shepherds it through the process, edits it and posts it (I can certainly add folks to this wordpress site easily enough!). People with or without podcasting experience could contribute either by PC submission, telephone, or text - the point is that they’re heard. I dream of seeing this project develop a life of its own. There has been no shortage of folks who are really enthused about the idea but the question is, how do we get from great idea to regular content?
March 11, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Okay, there’s a lot to think about here, so I’ll need to digest it to respond more effectively.
However — I will say one thing, and that is that I’ve actually been holding myself back from contributing because I could easily add something to any of those threads that are needing to move forward, but I don’t want to look like a hog (I’ve already contributed a couple of times, and I’ll be involved in the local eating one, too).
I really do want to see others contribute. If people felt my jumping in whenever I wanted to would get some things moving, I’d be happy to do it, and happy to step aside once others started jumping on board.
And I’d happily take on some of the editing if that’s helpful — again, I’ve been looking at this as “your” baby, and haven’t wanted to step on your toes.
I do think some ground rules are important, and some information on how things “work” is helpful.
March 11, 2008 at 8:36 pm
I will also need to digest this, and I am speaking as one of the guilty parties — I did a segment but still have to get the next person to follow me.
I’m not on Ning all the time, so I do need to do a better job of that. Let me give the file transfer issue some thought.
I don’t think anyone needs to feel like a hog at this point; if folks can fill in more right now, I think they should go for it.
I think this concept deserves to survive!!
March 11, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Uh-oh - I hope this didn’t come across as a tirade against anyone failing to do what they were supposed to. I had nobody in particular in mind when I wrote that and realize that we all have lives outside of podcasting and the internet. No apologies necessary.
As for “hogging” - maybe a few “hogs” are needed to jumpstart the process - passing topics onto the newer folks that haven’t had a chance. Just a thought.
And Katherine - thanks for the offer of editing help. At the moment editing one podcast every 2-4 weeks hasn’t been a problem at all. However in the future if things pick up and we have multiples going on at once it may be helpful to have others take it on just to keep things straight. When things first started and it was busy for the first few episodes it was a little crazy to remember who was doing what, what went where, and what came next.
I like the flexibility we’ve shown lately on the ning group of some eps being free for alls and others being the “old style”. So maybe we set some basic ground rules but then let it be up to the initiator to set other details. Of course so far the free for alls are not really moving at this point (I’m somewhat guilty as I intend to record a meal and a commute) so maybe they *aren’t* so good.
But to reiterate an important point and why I started typing this comment. While the entry was a bit of a vent on my part it wasn’t directed at anyone. I really see this as a community project, the idea of which has generated a lot of enthusiasm but that the execution isn’t in line with. I think this means that something isn’t designed quite right and needs to change.
Thanks for your thoughts, Katherine and John. Very much appreciated.
March 11, 2008 at 9:41 pm
Well, I didn’t perceive it as directed at anyone in particular, just you trying to put your finger on why the execution isn’t matching your expectations.
Of course, the easiest way to solve this is to change your expectations.
But that’s just the wannabee Buddhist in me writing.
March 11, 2008 at 9:46 pm
Good point
Of course the true Buddhist would skip the expectations entirely.
(*thinks perhaps that was a silly thing to say and should remember that if he meets the buddha on the road he should kill him immediately!*)
March 11, 2008 at 9:51 pm
I am feeling some of the same frustrations.
Some quick opinions on what might help:
#1 - some kind of workflow rules to keep projects on track, expected responses and turnover. Doesn’t mean we can’t be flexible, but a framework would be helpful.
#2 - I think we can get along well if the groundrules are established and respected, without necessarily having a “boss”. Sometimes interventions are necessary, but that can be done by subgroups of interested people.
#3 - platform: Seems to me this group is sort of unique, and may require us to be creative in how we use resources and services. We may need to move services again, if a different platform with more benefits presents itself.
#4 - file transfers: I suggested using a file drop for audio, like senduit.com or something similar, but that’s a short-term solution only. One solution for permanent storage would be the internet archive, either directly, or through Ourmedia.org. It’s how I started hosting my files before I went to libsyn.
#5 - methods: I think it should be loosely structured on the IETF Spec model. First, an idea is proposed in the “new projects” area like an RFP. If it’s decided that at least one more person would like to participate in that idea, then the project moves to an “in progress” area while folks record stuff for it, like an RFC. I guess we can skip all the other committee phases of the IETF
, then once enough is collected to do a show, it moves to a “production phase” where the show is mixed and edited, like a final Spec.
To continue but not sure where to put this because it fits under several of your questions:
When I created an idea from something someone had posted, I recorded a first clip, invited the next person I had in mind for it, but don’t know if the invite was received, and don’t really want to go chasing and pointing fingers. However, if I just take control back and invite someone else instead, I don’t want to get into a harangue about being impatient….
***********************************
You know what? I think we just need a simple constitution or manifesto, or user-agreement. Something everyone should read before they join, be very simple and clear, and as a community, have some courtesy and goodwill toward the other members, and expect it BACK.
***********************************
Umm, sorry. The room got real warm there for a minute.
I am NOT a political person, I hate politics.
OK; nitty gritty time. I don’t want to create laws. I want to create some flexible rules along which we can all shape our expectations of: acceptable behaviour, reasonable delays, acknowledgement of the jobs we take on, acceptance of our occasional failures, etc.
all right, I’ve gone on way too long. Somebody else please?
March 12, 2008 at 5:31 am
Todd - I didn’t take this as a tirade at all
Your post just reminded me that I had slipped in getting the next person to pick up the thread.
Regarding file sharing, perhaps a wiki or on online document management tool? there are open source tools available, and I have a site I am not using right now, so if you like I could look into that.
March 12, 2008 at 6:17 am
I have to balance the benefits of the new tech with the willingness of others to participate. There’s a learning curve on the wiki side for sure (though many in the community at Whole Wheat Radio has started to embrace it. Keep in mind that the move from facebook to ning lost us at least two contributors who were frustrated with the move. (Of course we gained many more than that so perhaps it is an acceptable loss.
March 12, 2008 at 10:13 am
Hi Krash,
Thanks for the suggestions - here are my thoughts:
1) I agree with the workflow rule idea. There has to be enough framework so people feel that they know what is going on. I’ve dropped the ball somewhat here.
2) I agree here also. I’m thinking more and more that perhaps once basic ground rules are established, perhaps the initiator becomes the producer, defining ground rules/format, editing the podcast, etc. This won’t always work (for example, a situation could come up where the initiator may not be confident in editing or just wants to toss an idea out there)
3) The groupware platform is a sticky issue with me. I’m a little nervous moving again having lost people to previous moves. However, if the current platform is part of what’s holding us back than that needs to change. Thoughts?
4) If we keep the ning platform, I think we could probably use it fairly easily for file transfers as there’s a GB of storage available to us there. While I started off wanting only WAV files that was mostly because in my original vision, each person would do a piece of the editing, taking what was before them and attaching their work. If we saved each time in 128kbps mp3 and did this a few times the quality could suffer. Now, however, I think if we go with 160 kbps mp3 for each piece and then mix down at the end to 128 I highly doubt we’ll have any issues. In fact, that was what was done with some pieces of the last one. So my thoughts are to stick with ning, but use mp3s as they’re a bit easier for everyone to work with. Transferring a few 100 MB AIFFs could be a royal pain for little gain.
5) Oh no! Not committees! ;^). I like the idea of floating ideas first to check interest. I have to wonder if that may be part of the limitation on some of the slower moving episodes where we’re tagging someone randomly. I, myself, dread the thought of being tagged for something I have little interest or ability to speak on and could see myself procrastinating like crazy on that. On the other hand, I do like the randomness of it all. It’s a tough balance. Maybe a compromise that could assess interest at the same time is for people to speak as generally as they feel comfortable on the topic (so as to not give it away) and figure out who is interested. For example: “I’m starting a thread on alternative energy. Who’s up to contributing in the next few weeks?” This then becomes the pool from which everyone is chosen. If only one other person chimes in the two can discuss whether it is worth making an episode (if you talk at length like Daryl and I did recently it might not be an issue). What I think I’d like to avoid is being too specific in the subject as it might actually colour the content of other contributors and subconsciously dictating what direction they take.
Okay - I like where this is going. Idea-bearer creates group on ning, posts a message saying “Who wants to contribute on this subject in next month or so?” (and maybe sends some emails as well to let others know if necessary). Flow type (chosen by creator - “passed baton” or “all hands” for lack of a better phrase) is set and target dates for contributions and air date are chosen (we need goals!). Pieces are posted to the group as they are recorded, and creator edits them all together into a nice pkg (or someone else (me?) edits) and it gets posted either by me or by someone else who could be given access to this wordpress site.
As for taking control back I think that’s a great idea. Originally my idea was that if someone couldn’t contribute it was their job to choose the next person or at least let the person inviting them know. Maybe a standard “please reply in 3 days or I’ll pick someone else” works. If it is a ground rule, nobody takes it personally - it is just the way it works. If one of us just sends it on our own, feelings could be hurt. The same could be true for any step in the process. The ep is a hot potato and if it sits one place too long things derail.
I think the “constitution” idea is a good one. Like I said above - if it is a rule, it is easier to follow and less likely to be taken personally. Let me think about some ideas for ground rules and please, if anyone has ideas pass them on.
March 12, 2008 at 10:37 am
Here’s one more thought — don’t worry about length, especially if the episode is short.
If two people do something, especially something time sensitive, and it’s 10 or 15 minutes long, then instead of trying to get more people to add to the thread, just decide that’s good enough, edit in some music and intros/outros, and bob’s your uncle.
If others feel strongly about what’s in the episode, they can always start another one.
March 12, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Agree strongly with Katherine on last comment, this is a combination of DIY and art, but we must be ok with letting it go as a good “starter” sometimes. If others pick up the baton afterwards, great!
March 12, 2008 at 9:34 pm
That was pretty much my idea as well. As long as there’s enough content to make an episode, it really doesn’t matter how few (but at least 2) or how many we start off with.