[ctp-tech] Re: Updated CTP diagram

+100 :) We discussed this in our Karrot call today, and one input was relating it to Sociocracy For All (SoFA) (one of our Karrot team is also a SoFA member) switching to a "network model", and the role of creating "agreements" between organisations, with some relation to the field of peace studies. I really like this potential of a culture of creating lots of small agreements between orgs/projects that help us build this bigger whole with clear intent and commitment. Yes, the "hats" framing helps me understand. I think our Karrot team plays a lot of the curator role, but also along with some of the community organisers from the groups, who are actually the ones initiating the local projects... but Karrot is also playing a role there, we are not just responding to their need, but come with some initiative ourselves - we're consciously embedded in our social/political perspectives, especially when they are not the norm of projects around. So there is some relation to wider movements/concepts (e.g. commons). It's complicated by the fact that there is two levels here, the groups that use Karrot, and the Karrot team itself, and those two levels aren't totally distinct. Usually though the groups will have a few other digital tools they use that are nothing to do with us, and us a Karrot team have some tools we use that the groups don't, and then some overlap. I think this is one of the good potentials of such a diagram/model - making it clearer how the specific group/project relates to the more general software project, and seeing how to make sure people understand those relations and their roles. I guess this is part of the scope of working out what a "community tech partnership" entails. I wonder if the nesting/levels aspect of it is useful to show? (so relating each local project with the overall project, which might be 1 tech platform + n projects). I wasn't quite clear what I was writing, or thinking, but I sense there are two (or more?) theory of changes happening at the same time - to give our karrot ecosystem as an example: there is the theory of change inside the project that uses (e.g. distribute food surpluses in a self-organised and fair way), the theory of change of karrot as a project (software to support self-organised groups to better co-ordinate their activities), and the theory of change of the CTP model (maybe what you wrote: "create reciprocal accontability between tech and community, with the eventual goal being shared ownership"). I often get confused between which level I'm working or thinking at! I think that is a great goal, and Karrot can definately benefit from having that clearer.. helping to develop fruitful partnerships, etc... (given lots of people rebuild apps with some similarity in function over and over). Yes, I would be up to do worked examples! A bit more feedback from our Karrot team was that: - it was initially overwhelming to look at - maybe there is a way to have it so you can get the overview, then drill down - or just a radically simplified version for general consumption? - some of the terminology/language was unclear to people not already in some of the field, e.g. the "As a...." framing - which I get, but maybe not everybody knows about that, depends on the audience... perhaps there is a way to use "everyday" language to describe the same thing? unless the increased precision of more specialist terms is worth the clarity Hope the feedback is useful! I've been interested to share it with people. Is it ok to share it within our Karrot team group? Cheers, Nick