Hi @Sirius 
I want to follow-up here on what you posted yesterday in our chatrooms, but explicitly mention that it serves mere example of general social dynamics I want to point out, that ail FOSS and social impact movements as a whole. Then place those against the backdrop of how Social coding commons deals with them.
You mentioned that Social coding commons urgently needs a map of who’s involved in what, so that value creation can take flight. And I agree with you that the need exists. Urgency though is not part of Social coding commons since it is a timeless movement. One which either moves, making progress and aggregating value, or pauses waiting for input by renewed proactive participation. Urgency is an emergent force, that shapes up by commons participants who want to act with certain speed, prioritize certain activities. In other words “urgency” is owned by commons participants, but not by the commons itself. And participants must take responsibility for it, plan, orchestrate and act accordingly.
Social coding commons introduces the concept of “working in commons” as a means to improve upon “working in public”. Working in commons solves 3 major challenges that rear their head, caused by the social dynamics that exists in grassroots environments:
- Tyranny of small decisions. Uncoordinated action makes it impossible to collaborate at scale.
- Herding of cats. Attempts to govern fiercely independent autonomous people doomed to fail.
- Tragedy of the commons. Unsustainable imbalance between value extraction and delivery.
Your statement of “There is an urgent need to …” is a very valuable thing in itself.
If you are in a client stakeholder role, then there is Opportunity for creators to work to satisfy that need, and get started with service development, value exchange, and solution delivery. The creator is just as well stakeholder in this arrangement, works against a set of sustainability criteria and has sustainability requirements flowing from that. The objective of Social coding commons is for a value-based service economy to emerge within the affiliation network of the commons. (cc lynnfoster). Where there is supply and demand of value, in the broadest meaning of the word. The creator then should ask themself what value they get in return for satisfying your stated need.
If you are in a creator stakeholder role, you have just pronounced an Opportunity for collaboration with other creators. To once again do service development for solutions that contribute to the value based commons economy. To reap the full Potential and synergies with other participants, form new alliances, and be generally more productive together. Streamline the work process along the way, based on needs as well (under SX the work process is an integral part of the solution itself).
Coming back to your statement of “Social coding commons urgently needs [perceived need]” then has two interpretations:
- In chaordic commons its a clear call for service exchange in the value based commons economy.
- In chaotic commons it is indicative of the three challenges listed, inhibiting them to various extent.
The commons itself conceptually does not have needs, only its participants have. A statement of a need to the commons easily turns into an expectation or placing a demand even, where the responsibility is implicitly shifted to “someone else”. Someone has to do it.
And in FOSS indeed often someone does it. But ever so often that effort is not sustainable.