Talk:Collating: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 11:46, 21 March 2004

Do you have a scheme for collating information about mergers and the like in real time?

Other essential projects seem to be doing that. See who owns what too.

A wiki-based process gives us some edges in what we tackle, so here the focus is probably on service cycle and comprehensive outcome information, so that the real outcome of tantallum, diamond, charcoal, cocoa, coffee, other food and wood consumption is known and people can prioritize where to change their habits or buying patterns. Probably many Campaigns will be focused on one industry at a time, rather than focusing strictly on a company, though the worst-performing company should usually be targetted as an example, this is tactical. The strategy is: know the comprehensive outcome of everything you buy, apply individual buying criteria yourself and institutional buying criteria in standard labels or factions, and don't count on corporations to have real ethics. At least, none that you don't enforce yourself or in concert with others like yourself.

Originally permanent recording of mergers and such business rearrangements was close to the concept core, but now as we've gone from entry-time-enforced XML design approach to gradually-negotiated Wiki design this is does not seem a key issue. The original distinction about being forgiving on individuals (somebody) and unforgetting on corporations (not-body) --Juxo 13:46, 21 Mar 2004 (EET)

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 :Other [[essential projects]] seem to be doing that.  See [[who owns what]] too.
-:A wiki-based process gives us some edges in what we tackle, so here the focus is probably on [[service cycle]] and [[comprehensive outcome]] information, so that the real outcome of [[diamond]], [[charcoal]], [[cocoa]], [[coffee]] and [[wood]] consumption is known and people can prioritize where to change their habits or buying patterns.  Probably many [[Campaign]]s will be focused on one industry at a time, rather than focusing strictly on a company, though the worst-performing company should usually be targetted as an example, this is tactical.  The strategy is:  know the [[comprehensive outcome]] of everything you buy, apply [[individual buying criteria]] yourself and [[institutional buying criteria]] in [[standard label]]s or [[faction]]s, and don't count on [[corporation]]s to have real ethics.  At least, none that you don't enforce yourself or in concert with others like yourself.
+:A wiki-based process gives us some edges in what we tackle, so here the focus is probably on [[service cycle]] and [[comprehensive outcome]] information, so that the real outcome of [[tantallum]], [[diamond]], [[charcoal]], [[cocoa]], [[coffee]], other [[food]] and [[wood]] consumption is known and people can prioritize where to change their habits or buying patterns.  Probably many [[Campaign]]s will be focused on one industry at a time, rather than focusing strictly on a company, though the worst-performing company should usually be targetted as an example, this is tactical.  The strategy is:  know the [[comprehensive outcome]] of everything you buy, apply [[individual buying criteria]] yourself and [[institutional buying criteria]] in [[standard label]]s or [[faction]]s, and don't count on [[corporation]]s to have real ethics.  At least, none that you don't enforce yourself or in concert with others like yourself.
+::Originally permanent recording of mergers and such business rearrangements was close to the concept core, but now as we've gone from entry-time-enforced [[XML]] design approach to gradually-negotiated [[Wiki]] design this is does not seem a key issue. The original distinction about being forgiving on individuals ([[body|somebody]]) and unforgetting on corporations ([[not-body]]) --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 13:46, 21 Mar 2004 (EET)