[Taxacom] Success criteria of a collaboration facility?

Phillip S. Boegh 2phillipsmail at gmail.com
Wed Feb 2 05:51:43 CST 2011

Dear Taxonomists

I aggree that both
1. "individuals and organisations" need to be included. That is already 
in progress in TaxNet.
2.a "re-use of information" is ever ongoing but no "redevelopment of the 
2.b Our "clear profile" is "Easy like Facebook - option to select your 
relevant information only" But it is more difficult to propagate the 
ideas - clear or not.
3. TaxNet is designed to be worldwide with all taxa. However, we do not 
need a new TaxaCom as they do this perfectly. I think, taxonomy needs 
TaxNet's scalable version so you can work with in your own community 
(=planning), with colleagues, with small communities of your taxonomic 
family or larger your order, with taxonomists in general or even use it 
'public' (e.g., as publications). The TaxNet for Dipterist is our 
test-site to learn what is needed, and that's why we also ask the below 
questions, openly*.



On 02/02/2011 11:43 AM, Gregor Hagedorn wrote:
>> What is success criteria of a collaboration facility?
> My points:
> 1. A collaboration facility ideally should adress both individuals and
> organisations.
> 2. It should care to facilitate re-use of information and should have
> a clear profile of what is the "product" that is to be the outcome of
> the collaboration
> 3. It probably works best if the number of collaborators and scope of
> collaboration is large. The present model, however, seem to be small
> focussed interest sites, where each special interest is investing
> large resources to redevelop the wheel.
> I personally believe the community needs a wiki-like collaboration facility.
> We have started species-id.net but are very open to larger ideas.
> Gregor

 > On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Phillip S. Boegh
 > Dear Taxonomists
 > What is success criteria of a collaboration facility?
 > 1 8-) Does a collaboration facility improve collaboration? This is
 > related to the present email-collaboration.
 > Must collaboration success imply:
 > 2 :-\ $$. Compete for fast money to projects or sustainable funding for
 > the taxonomists?
 > 3 :-* Time-saving? This is related to whether you need “All to be done
 > from this facility”
 > 4 ;-) Inspiration from an open forum - to debate or answer your 
 > 5 :-X A closed&  filtered facility?: Do you like the facility by default
 > discern career from non-career taxonomists, plus peer reviewed
 > information from other information? This is related to: Who is an expert
 > and what is appropriate information?
 > 6 :-[ Peer review, Open peer review (Wikipedia) or a Secure platform for
 > database classification?

If you go to:
 > you'll find suggestions that elaborate the above points 1-6. However, we
 > are more curious about your expectations :-) !?

More information about the Taxacom mailing list