[somos-azucar] Libertad, apertura y confidencialidad (era: Re: Update of team activities and Trello.com invitation)

[Aleksey Lim]

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 01:22:05PM -0500, Sebastian Silva wrote:
> ...
>
> However sometimes, for effective execution, we are forced to used some non-free 
> tools, such as most cell phones, ATMs, television sets, street lights, 
> elevators, google groups, etc.
> 
> Please be assured that for us, this is a BUG.
> 
> Now, wrt "openness", it is part of our organizational Principles, that areas of 
> confidentiality should be explicitly defined. For the moment we are working on 
> strategic objectives, relations with other entities, possible sources of 
> financing, etc. This information is not ready to be shared.
> 
> The use of this tool is an experiment within this explicit area of 
> confidentiality, permissible within our declared principles. Anyhow, also 
> in accordance with our principles, we do sustain that what does not needs 
> to be confidential, be public and published in the Wiki.

For sure, some sorts of things will require confidence and keeping it
private, e.g., possible funding sources that prefer keeping the
process not public. The right question, for me, is what part, within the
global community process, should be disclosured. For example:

         (announced project #1)...(announced project #n)
                              ^   ^
                               \ /
                                +
                                |
                                v
    (discussion to sort out useful projects and apoint priorities)
            ^                   |
            |                   +<--(finding)
            |                   |
            |                   v
            +--(the financial plan for some period)
            ^                   |
            |                   v
            +--(board approvement of financial plan)
            ^                   |
            |                   v
            +--------------(execution)

For me, the only two parts of this scheme might be:

(1) (finding)
    entirely, for understandable reasons, disclosured

(2) (execution)
    partially disclosured, i.e., (announced projects) already declared
    the purpose, timeline, and the results that projects are trying
    to achieve; that public info should be enough to see how successful
    (execution) was/is

The rest needs to be publicly discussed, i.e., not only stated about the
progress. For me, using already existing tools like Wiki, mailing lists,
IRC and issue trackers (existing within the SL, i.e., trac and RT)
should be pretty enough.

What instruments, to handle (1) and (2), people, involved to such processes,
will choose, is a case of their responsibility. For sure, there are possible
trade-offs between openness and making things done.

-- 
Aleksey