OpenWetWare:Steering committee next meeting archive

From OpenWetWare

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
==12/14/06 Meeting==
 +
*Results from the [[OpenWetWare:Hiring|hiring options meeting.]] (jason)
 +
*Meeting with [http://scilink.com Scilink] (sri, brian)
 +
*Subwikis (austin)
 +
*iGEM 2007 on OWW (jason)
 +
**1400 participants, some special requests
 +
*OWW Services page (jenny)
 +
* OWW Categories 
 +
==11/9/06 Meeting==
==11/9/06 Meeting==
*Multiple licensing options when uploading content. ([[Reshma Shetty|Reshma]]? noticed you mentioned this.)
*Multiple licensing options when uploading content. ([[Reshma Shetty|Reshma]]? noticed you mentioned this.)

Revision as of 17:19, 14 December 2006

Contents

12/14/06 Meeting

  • Results from the hiring options meeting. (jason)
  • Meeting with Scilink (sri, brian)
  • Subwikis (austin)
  • iGEM 2007 on OWW (jason)
    • 1400 participants, some special requests
  • OWW Services page (jenny)
  • OWW Categories

11/9/06 Meeting

  • Multiple licensing options when uploading content. (Reshma? noticed you mentioned this.)
  • Nature methods submission / consensus protocols (James)
    • Should we write a longer article about the entirety of OWW as well?
      • Would be good for advertising, but also to provide substrate to our supporters out there - from maureen: "I'm not available for the meeting today but am following the discussion and will look at the meeting notes. Nice idea about the article. I'm trying hard to get the FA community on the wiki. Many are interested but just don't seem to understand it or how it could benefit them. This article will help."
  • OWW Concept paper for seeking finding - e.g. science commons concept paper
  • DOI server - might be nice to be able to have people be able to request a DOI for a particular page that they want to reference in a paper, submit to some sort of PLoS One type repository, etc. We wouldn't need to have a DOI for every edit, but give users the option... this falls in the general category of making OWW more citable, and thus provide more avenues for garnering merit for contributing. (Jason)

10/12/06 Meeting

  • Jasonk 11:35, 13 September 2006 (EDT): Official sysop policy?
  • Jasonk 11:52, 23 September 2006 (EDT): Remove the calendar from the sidebar.
  • Jasonk 09:44, 6 October 2006 (EDT): NIH $ and hiring.
  • Update on Rackspace move (Ilya)
  • reddit/ voting of cool pages (John c)
  • highlights (John c)
  • BioSysBio and using the wiki for abstract submissions (John C)
  • Postgenomic (Jasonk)
    • Good opportunity here, anyone interested in thinking more about how to best do it?

9/14/06 Meeting

  • Jasonk 17:23, 4 September 2006 (EDT): Make it easy to make an OWW page compliant with postgenomic so it can get aggregated there.
  • Jasonk 17:28, 4 September 2006 (EDT): Statistics and survey guru. Might want to have someone who keeps an eye on trends on the site. this could range from surveys of people are using the site as was suggested previously, to looking over site analytics (which will come with new hosting service), or to just tracking site statistics (number of users, number of labs, etc). This sort of information could help the SC make more informed decisions.
  • Reshma 10:12, 5 September 2006 (EDT): I've been trying to work on a tutorial on how to host courses on OWW. Feedback/help welcome.
  • Jasonk 07:59, 7 September 2006 (EDT): Should we have an officially sanctioned forum area? Could be a stopgap until the "liquid threads" or whatever gets included in mediawiki...
    • Reshma 08:27, 7 September 2006 (EDT): There's Questions and Answers for research-questions and the Community portal for OpenWetWare questions. Do we need more than that?
    • Jasonk 08:56, 7 September 2006 (EDT): Well, this isn't a new topic or anything, but the having discussions is facilitated by threads (and stuff like 'post reply' button, etc). If we think the Mediawiki implementation is going to take to too long, we may consider getting some forum software to run on the site (it wouldn't have to perfectly integrate with the wiki for the short term) - i think hacing a "latest forum discussions" box similar to the one on the front page of protocols online would help OWW be a place to post your general biology questions. It's a good question why a Q&A section hasn't taken off on OWW, it may just be the community is too small, or it could be that the technical hurdles are too high.
  • Jasonk 08:59, 7 September 2006 (EDT):Firm up short term (6 month) SC goals
  • Jasonk 10:31, 10 September 2006 (EDT):SciFoo report
Personal tools