- Dec 2024
-
writing.bobdoto.computer writing.bobdoto.computer
-
Reinforces the communal nature of knowledge workAll ideas are in communication with and informed by others, regardless of whether we work in direct collaboration with others. A collaborative zettelkasten not only shows this in real time, but allows participants to actively engage with a collective web of insight.
This is key imo. The link between personal knowledge and communal K. In context of TGL it also means fleshing out the purpose, identity and intent of our work. A step to and in support of [[Networked Agency 20160818213155]] , here the functioning as a company Can I express this to the team?
This is a benefit that Doto does not express (because he stays within the context of ZK, and this one becomes apparent if you look at the ZK in the context of the group of collab. Any non-random and pre-existing group will find theur benefit in that context, rather than in the instrument's built-in affordances. tech+issue=value.
-
Once the ideas have been organized in a way that makes sense, the real writing begins. Bring the ideas and any useful comments into a new writing doc. Decide on who will do what, taking into consideration each participant's strength.
In TGL this would the diff domain teams and project teams, putting stuff to their own purpose.
-
A Collaborative Zettelkasten for Collaborative Output
Vgl landscapes, IEC writing projects, deskresearch/essays in general.
-
Working with the Collaborative Network of Ideas
For me the purpose of a collab zk would need to be aligned to what drives the collaborators. E.g. how I tie pkm to individual professional activism and autonomy, and extended/aggregated to teamkm it drives the core value of constructive activism of my company, and how we use [[Systems convening denken Wenger Trayner 20230914131102]] to translate that into interventions and desirable client projects. Vgl [[PKM systems convening activisme relatie 20241123085857]] expressing that connection.
-
Participants may or may not have a common output, goal, or project in mind when they start. The only requirements are: all participants add to the collection of main notes all participants establish connections between ideas all participants are free to pull from the zettelkasten for their writing projects
This describes a wiki too. What difference? Wiki tends to follow the Wikipedia model perhaps, aiming for completeness / definitive state? Wikipedia is not atomic in the ZK sense. Also public wiki's (the ones one is by def aware of) are an output themselves. My internal wiki 2004-2012 was much more atomic and not an output but an instrument. So if wiki then more of the instrument style, iow ZK by another name. A collective network of meaning and sense making
-