Global Sensemaking

Tools for Dialogue and Deliberation on Wicked Problems

What shall we call ourselves? [New Deadline 23:59 PM GMT 10th May]

The live poll is here.

We have the chance to replace the name "" with our own Ning-free domain name, which we can also keep with us, if we decide to migrate elsewhere.

So, what shall we call ourselves? A suggestion to start the process: ( or .org or .net)

Further suggestions and votes below please (with the winner being the suggestion with the most votes at 23:59 PM PST on 9th May)...


The list of suggestions submitted so far is (in alphabetical order):

HC4D on Earth Issues
Human Centered Design for Global Sensemaking [HCDGS]

Thanks to everyone who has participated so far. And keep the suggestions flowing.

As an alternate approach: Mark Aakhus has suggested considering a non-issue specific name, and adopting issue-specific names on a project-by-project basis. Suggestions for names of this type are welcome too.

I'll post a poll on Friday to facilitate the voting process.

Views: 200

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion


Well I think you hit the nail on the head. Modeling is a necessary tool for anticipatory systems. I've been deeply involved in strategic planning for our campus and have been pushing a sensemaking approach to internal systems analysis. The Director of Institutional Research is familiar with IBIS and is going to be looking into it.

As regards ConsensUs it has been on hold for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is a dirth of students who are long-term committed enough to produce coherent code. We don't have PhD students on this campus and MS students seem to only be here for the paper to get a better job! Since joining this group I have been thinking about a white paper if for no other reason than to get some ideas out on the table. The main issues with ConsensUs was that it attempts to address scalability issues to support really large discourse communities (overlain on a P2P network to achieve cost effectiveness). I thought the topic tree backbone approach would add more structure to the process to support top-down analysis and bottom-up solutions (sort of a divide-and-conquer strategy).

Anyway, if folks here were interested I could put some effort into a white paper to summarize its concept without having to read through that long screed I have now.

BTW: I can't find the poll for this thread. I must be missing something. I need to e-mail David I guess.

The pole appears on the home page. It's an applet that pops up at the top of the page. I presume that's what you are talking about.

In an earlier life, I built a program I called TSC (short for "The Scholar's Companion"). Before I met Doug Engelbart, I was mostly interested in augmenting personal intellect; after that meeting, I grew to believe collective IQ makes more sense. TSC is a qualitative process reasoner with a genetic programming component (similar to Eurisko) that allows for internal mutations of concepts and relations. A grad student at U.Dayton used it to discover new polymer curing rules, and I used it personally to discover a new behavior that turned out to be important but which was not generally known to medicine men: don't take antioxidants when you are a compromised host. That all fell out of a model of immune response that TSC learned from human inputs; I'm writing a bit about that as a "connecting the dots" example in my Knowledge Federation 08 paper. Modeling turns out to be enormously valuable.

I already read through the long screed. It was helpful. While you do go into some detail about using JXTA, I have yet to be fully sold on the value of P2P, except that video skype really works well (when it works at all).
Alas, I can't find the poll either. I don't get any kind of applet that pops up. Can someone post a URL to the poll?


Thanks for the suggestion, George, and for introducing a new meme.

I have added SystemScienceEarth to the collected list at the top.
Drawing Mark Aakhus's and George's ideas together, how about describing what we are doing as building a:




GlobaDebatingSystem? the mental equivalents to a GlobalPositioningSystem [GPS].
While Climate is our current focus, it is of course desirable that other thematic clusters will emerge, from ourselves or others who want to use our tools to tackle their burning issues.

So I like Mark's suggestion that we stick to something non-thematic for the top level domain. So, the welcome page would introduce people to the world of structured deliberation/debate tools, and then go to /climate to get to our Ning network. The implication is that we or others might add their own subspaces. Each thematic community will have distinctive features and tools that might change the way our generic tools are used.

So, much as I love GlobalSensemaking it may be a little opaque to some, and broadens the field to ANY tool that supports SM. I would suggest the friendlier to keep it focused on our core business of dialogue, argument, deliberation and debate (but of course, supported by other tools relevant to this theme, like simulations etc).

Thanks Simon.

I have added to the collected list at the top—and it appears that it is possible to achieve a degree of thematic structure within Ning, using the (sub)Groups feature—although the range of features available within a (sub)Group is not as extensive yet as those available within the network as a whole.

I got to thinking, and this is what fell out. Visit and perhaps you might think along a similar line. What I've discovered quite recently is a host of really cool sensemaking efforts, like Open Notebook Science, and a bunch of similar sites entailed by that, the opnTag things I mentioned elsewhere, and then bioforge. What struck me is that there's a plethora of stuff going on 'out there' that could easily be imagined to federate and contribute in some way to to the effort we propose. I guess I'm thinking of a federation of sensemaking efforts as perhaps a different, but worthy of consideration, goal, with members here contributing as Simon has suggested.

What struck me is the meta-opportunity to become a forge where we foster the creation of better dogfood, nourishment for sensemaking (sorry, I couldn't resist).
As and when people request /poverty, /terrorism, /health etc (not that frequent one imagines), then we could manually set up redirects to whatever environment they choose to use to coordinate their efforts, be it Ning or something else.






  • Add Videos
  • View All


  • Add Photos
  • View All



© 2024   Created by David Price.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service