[OWW-SC] OpenWetWare and Nature Publishing Group

[Barry Canton]

I'm happy with what we would offer NPG.

I'm happy with most of what we would receive.  Two comments -

1.A&B - I would prefer if NPG provided the staff/hardware rather than the
finances as I think it would significantly reduce the work/responsibility of
the steering committee.  Could they work at MIT but be NPG employee's?

1.C - I like the idea of a major project.  We should discuss if the
Distribution is the highest priority thing we could get from them.  Would it
be single best thing that would improve the community or its rate of
growth?  Furthermore, if the collaboration with NPG were to end after a year
or two, we would then be left with the responsibility of maintaining the
distribution.  Other major projects that might be considered (tagging?)
would not require a long-term investment of time/money, which might make
them more suitable for a trial collaboration with NPG.

Barry

On 7/7/06, Sri Kosuri <skosuri at mit.edu> wrote:
>
> Hello all,
>
> First, thank you to everyone that helped with drafting the grant and
> writing letters of support.  The proposal is essentially in final form and
> it took much effort by many of us.  Having the document will have benefits
> beyond this grant, and will help with any new venture or collaboration in
> the future.  The grant will be submitted by the OSP (Office of Sponsered
> Projects) on Monday, and at that point I will send out a copy of the grant
> to everyone.
>
> Second, we were approached recently by Peter Collins and Greg Urquhart of
> Nature Publishing Group about strengthening ties between our two groups.
> For the past few years NPG has been exploring how best to engage
> communities of scientists more directly, as well as provide new
> communication tools for them (or so they say).  They are interested in
> forming relationships at many levels depending on our interest: from just
> general support and help with funding all the way to complete managerial
> take over of the site.
>
> Obviously such an offer, while flattering makes us ask questions about the
> intentions of such a venture and the trustability of relinquishing control
> to or even establishing close ties with an old and venerated for-profit
> publishing group.  After giving it some thought, a few of us thought we
> would put together a reasonable set of offer  and then run it by the
> committee for thoughts/reactions/suggestions/or better proposals that would
> seem to work. So here goes:
>
> In general, we are asking for collaboration at first, and would consider
> tighter relationships with NPG in the future depending on the success of
> these initial projects.
>
> 1.  What we are asking for: NPG and OpenWetWare would form a relationship
> which could include any or all of the following things:
> A.  Direct support for hardware and/or support for that hardware.
> B.  Direct support of a software developers tasked by the steering
> committee.
> Both of these could either take a form of a direct monetary donations, or
> contractual committments to provide these services through NPG's existing
> infrastructures.
> C.  A major project chosen by the steering committee is planned and
> execute independently by NPG in house.  For example, NPG could become
> responsible for development of a personal OWW distribution.  This would
> involve simple installers for Unix, Mac, PC, installation instructions, and
> simple ways to publish to OWW.  The specifications for such software would
> be made by the Steering Committee, and NPG would produce the software, and
> committ to continued development for some time period.
> D.  Advertising for OpenWetWare.  This is minimal and obvious to some
> extent.
> E.  Tools that make sense for NPG.  For example, a link on all of their
> papers saying "discuss and comment on OpenWetWare".  They would be taking
> advantage of our existing community and we would get traffic and growth.
> (and perhaps tools to support this with other publishing groups).
>
> 2.  What they would recieve: We can also imagine a couple of things that
> could be pallatable depending on the level of committment and support.
> A. On every page will be a link to Sponsors.  Upon clicking that link,
> there will be a page describing sponsoring groups and details on how they
> are helping OpenWetWare.  For example, such a page would already include MIT
> CSBi for server space, and Microsoft iCampus project for seed funding
> through the end of the year.  That page could also describe the current
> status of any relationship with NPG along with a logo.
>
> B. A small NPG image on the bottom of OWW pages (i.e, the CC logo).
> We need help with all aspects as we are a volunteer effort.  We can begin
> by some modest levels of support for some basic hardware/et cetera as well
> as people that will help support openwetware.  those members would work with
> OWW on projects of mutual interest. (i.e., the distribution, tighter
> integration with the literature, et cetera).  If the relationship is
> fruitful for the both of us, we will continue to make stronger committments
> to each other.
>
> So we are asking for your thoughts and comments specifically on these
> proposals, and also on what proposals you think could work better.  Finally,
> I also should say that of course these discussions are somewhat private, and
> that they not be disclosed directly on OpenWetWare.  So please email me, or
> the steering committee list if appropriate.
>
> Thanks,
> Sri
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenWetWare Steering Committee Mailing List
> sc at openwetware.org
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-sc
>
>
>


-- 
Barry Canton
Endy Lab
Biological Engineering Division
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Tel.:(617) 899 6062
Email1: bcanton at mit.edu
Email2: bcanton at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/oww-sc/attachments/20060707/121f5aa5/attachment.htm