Changing community Mission Statement for a clearer, more manageable scope

I see what you mean @micheleminno and also the points others in this thread are making, so I am warming to the idea of actually changing our Mission Statement.

We have discussed that a clearer scope restriction for the community is in order, and your Mission Statement incorporates that. I don’t think your last 2 bullet points are mutually exclusive, but that we may need to make a choice to get to a manageable scope (May be in line with what you meant with “We can’t be on both sides”).

However, I think we should restrict further:

  • Let’s keep the 4 strategic pillars, but leave CHT to focus on pillar 2) Political pressure (Advocacy) and 3) Engaging employees (Adoption)
  • Then ICT is still too broad. We won’t do cyberwarfare, we won’t do industrial automation, etc. We focus on the Internet primarily!

Then I’d like to have a Mission Statement that is our Slogan/Tagline at the same, so it should be shorter, and a good marketing term.

‘The Web’ is often used as synonymous to ‘The Internet’ (e.g. as used by Solid: “Re-decentralizing The Web”). When using ‘Web’ in our statement, this encompasses the hardware (e.g. smartphones) to access it.

So how about the following options as tagline/mission statement for our community:

  1. Humane Tech Community - Redesigning the Web for Humans - (focus on the humane design aspect)
  2. Humane Tech Community - Improving the Web for Humans - (same, but more modest)
  3. Humane Tech Community - Creating a Web Fit for Humans - (imply current unfitness, from harms to solutions)
  4. Humane Tech Community - Towards a Web for Humans - (mission + vision)
  5. Humane Tech Community - Humans Make the Web - (focus on human values)
  6. Humane Tech Community - Humans Remaking the Web - (transformation)
  7. Humane Tech Community - Solving the Harms of the Web - (from harms to solution, solution-focused)

…along these lines.

2 Likes

Yes you’re right, I had edited my post and changed it.

I think my last 2 bullet points as exclusive, not because they are logically exclusive, but as two completely opposite directions we could go as HCT: one towards the individual, leaving society (market, government, international entities) rules as they are, the other one changing the rules of the game, thing that would bring cascading consequences for individuals.

About mission statement, what do you think of:

  • Removing the ‘under the hood’ profits from your web experience .

I still don’t think they are opposites, but instead they closely interact (e.g. privacy Wild West —> GDPR law —> Adapt IT systems accordingly).

But that doesn’t matter, if:

  • CHT focuses on aligning the rules to the web
  • HTC focuses on aligning the web to humans

I don’t think your statement is phrased well enough (but I’m no native English speaker myself). It sounds ‘individualistic’ to me, and ‘profit’ should not be in it, in any form, I think.

More options:

  • Humane Tech Community - Making The Web Work For Humans
  • Humane Tech Community - Creating a Web For All
  • Humane Tech Community - Redesign Our Web, Accessible And Safe
  • Humane Tech Community - Our Web, Reclaimed And Safe

Or, since we will not be the actual creators:

  • Humane Tech Community - Re-imagining The Beneficial Web
  • Humane Tech Community - Re-envisioning A Web That Works

Or simply:

  • Humane Tech Community - Reclaiming The Web
  • Humane Tech Community - Re-envisioning The Web
  • Humane Tech Community - Towards A Proper Web

Pfew… found more options without ‘human’ in it :slight_smile:

Note: Every slogan gets Humane Tech Community prepended.

I’m coming in late here but the word ethics means- The study of the general nature of morals and of the specific moral choices to be made by a person; moral philosophy & humanitarian- One who is devoted to the promotion of human welfare and the advancement of social reforms.

Humanitarians through ethical technology HTET

Maybe I’m missing something though…

Yes, ethics is certainly important to our efforts. The problem is that the term is fuzzy, subjective and does not appeal directly to the masses. Ethics are for someone else to implement. Also ‘humanitarians’ doesn’t appeal to a broad adiences. Both ethics and humanitarianism do not cover the scope of our community accurately, I think.

I have a proposal, that I am quite excited about, that I will present in my next post below, accompanied with a diagram showing how the concepts all fit together.

The two orange arrows are both important. But every group I’m in is trying to be both. I’m sure I sound like a broken record, but I think focus might help.

What’s so wrong about a community focused 100% on activism (creating a cultural awakening) OR professional networking (with other doers in the humane tech space).

In my own work I feel the pull. As a CEO, I’m 100% committed to my company (reallyread.it) but I’d also like to engage in activism against (1) the tech giants (2) shitty, over-used features and products (the infinite “News” Feed on FB, Twitter, LinkedIn, and now Reddit) and (3) the US government, utterly asleep at the wheel.

@aschrijver - You’re doing great (hard) work. Keep it up. Is the proposed mission statement “Bridging the Gap Between Humans and the Web” or “Realigning Technology to Humanity’s Best Interest”

2 Likes

Thank you, @loundy! Proposed (just by me) is “Bridging the Gap Between Humans and the Web”, and the other mission still applies to the Center for Humane Technology (we being the Community). This already constitutes a severe restriction of scope and division of work + focus.

I get your ‘one or the other’ idea, and it has its merits. But focus on both orange arrows is also really strong:

  • Raise people’s awareness on tech harms and give them the tools to mitigate them
  • Raise employee’s awareness on (need + benefits) humane technology and give them the feedback to adopt it
1 Like

FYI: All the posts above - except the first one - were split from this topic, and from here dedicated discussions continue.

The image and idea resonate with me. However “bridging the gap between” leaves me wondering what the gap is and whether ‘humans’ and ‘the web’ are the right names for each side.

Another reason we need something from each direction: without a feedback loop b/t individuals and designers, focusing on one in isolation can lose relevance.

Hi @metasj. Nice to ‘see’ you :slight_smile:

I was starting to doubt the slogan myself as well. It gives the idea of humans adapting to technology, by bridging the gap. It should be the other way around. I found some things mentioned by @boydcsterin What it means to be human appealing. Thinking of something like ‘technnology but with a heart’ and then in proper form. Maybe @nivedita in the design contest came quite close:

Gears of the heart

PS The ‘Web’ was chosen because the restriction to online/digital technology is clearer, and because it rhymes (Solid project uses web in the same sense (Re-decentralizing the Web). Their tech is not just suitable for websites)

Hi @aschrijver. I’m new to this community, an aspiring Humane Tech Activist :wink:
It is not very clear to me now what exactly the mission statement etc. is or is becoming.
Perhaps you could start a new thread for this (as you did) without the previous discussion attached (just linking to that)?

I actually do like the broadly defined statement “To Re-align Technology to Humanity’s Best Interests” as a mission statement.
As this community grows, as a result of increased awareness and awakening, there will be more and more people focusing on a broad range of topics as well.

With respect to active cooperation and solution-finding, as a community we should try and find a way to set priorities to solve problems where we collectively determine that the need is highest. And this will provide focus for objectives activities. As an example, for me at this point in time it would be to find ways to protect our children from being enslaved by technology.

2 Likes

Thanks for your feedback, @Mndctrl, and welcome to the community! Great to hear you want to become an activist :smiley:

Neither it is for me, or any of us yet, that is what this topic is for. Note, that nothing will change until we find a proper way forward. The ‘mission slogans’ are just brainstorming, but the image concept (minus slogan) seems very worthwhile to evaluate consider further, and I will also discuss it with the CHT.

I like the original statement too, and we ran with that from the start, but - see the first post in this topic - it keeps leading to discussion and unclarities what we stand for. Also I advise you read my PDF from May 2018 on CHT positioning inconsistencies, that still exist today.

With regards to approach to cooperation in creating solutions it boils down to organization and community principles. Our broad audience all have different motives to participate. Yours is tech vs. children, someone else surveillance capitalism + privacy and yet others go for ethics, tech monopolies vs. decentralization, edtech, etc. etc.

But the biggest challenge is getting people to actively participate in laying the groundwork of the community !

The HTC is a crowdsourced community of volunteers. I think a lot of the work in building the foundations is very exciting, but there is also the tedious work that has to be done. Currently I’m doing most of this work, but I only have so much time, so it is slow-going. Getting help here will be my primary focus for the time being.

1 Like

Clear…

Will read up and reach out to you related to what can be done…

:sunglasses:

1 Like

re: mission statement
As is stated, “To Re-align Technology to Humanity’s Best Interests” presumes that Humane Tech knows what is best for humanity. I came to this website because I was bought in on the problem that technology is controlling our minds and demanding our time and attention, making us feel more disconnected than ever before. I think the mission statement should involve taking back control of our attention or ability to connect with real people.

re: imagery
I think the imagery, along with the team photos, serve as a point of distraction. The vintage style brings up an internal dialogue that doesnt seem productive in achieving your stated goals. In my opinion, people are more likely to identify with more contemporary imagery.

1 Like

Thank you for the input @Doug!

Yes, the mission slogan is a bold statement. While short, implicitly it does make clear what this is about. If we all put our shoulders together, humanity should be able to take control of the direction of technological development in ways that serve our common interests better than they do now.

It is a very broad subject. On a personal level it is our time and attention and real-life connections to others at stake. But these lead to even more fundamental problems where democracy and the fabric of civil society is in the balance.

At the Humane Tech Community (HTC) we are looking to a slogan that expresses the mission so that it has a manageable scope. We don’t know yet where that goes really. The imagery and the original slogan are the same as those of the Center for Humane Technology (CHT) and they may also change it, but that is not part of this discussion.

We use the imagery in some places in community content, but will replace that with community-created artwork when that is available.

The division of the 4 strategic pillars between community and center as depicted in this image seems to be a very good one to me (the community slogan proposal there, not so much). It restricts the community’s scope and allows:

  • The community to be (mostly) political neutral, less involved in politics directly and more resistant to corporate lobbying
    • —> Preconditions to be fully transparent, working in the open on inclusive crowdsourced initiatives
  • We can be more outspoken than the CHT, less diplomatic, as we represent the public’s view
    • —> Strategic strength (public pressure) for the CHT in their advocacy to governments and corporations

The fact that community and center are separately positioned as independent entities is important to make this workable.

When discussing this with @patm she responded with these good points:

What occurs to me when I read this is the need for specificity and precision. If we can pinpoint what is wrong, we can focus companies’ attention–just as they try to focus ours–on particular things to fix.

And if we can speak respectfully as well as knowledgeably, perhaps we can get their cooperation without having to compromise.

Exactly. The pillar division is just the first part of scope restriction to attain focus within the community. I imagine a 2-dimensional grid. On the y-axis are the topics of humane technology, and on the x-axis is the ‘breadth’ or extent to which we’ll cover it.

The limitation to 2 strategic pillars restricts the breadth —> From Awareness to Improvement.
The knowledgeability that is involved increases going from one to the other. We make everyone aware (inclusivity) and on a journey to help find solutions. Their skills and interests determine where they can help. This goes along a ‘funnel’ with researchers and experts on the far end.

On the X-axis there are still too many humane tech topics. I think we should combine them into a max. of 3 different focus areas. Then we can effectively divide the community to these areas based on people’s primary interests (focus groups).

On ‘speaking respectfully’: That should be part of the community principles and philosophy. It is the norm. We do not compromise here and deliver honest feedback and criticism where it is due - just as we do with people presenting their own apps to the forum.

Now what could be the focus areas on the x-axis?

Just brainstorming, I am thinking of the following:

  • Digital Health & Wellbeing

    • Physical health, mental health, parenting, education, digital literacy, time-well-spent
  • Privacy & Freedom

    • Digital rights, privacy, freedom of information, censorship, surveillance (capitalism)
  • Civics & Relationships

    • Democracy, fake news, journalism, online political influencing, trolling, cyberbullying, cybercrime

Not so easy to find a good division, needs more thinking. Note also that e.g. ethics can be in each of the areas.

Finally, there could be a z-axis to make a division of the community audience in: Everyone and Children

1 Like

Our new mission has been defined.

This topic can serve to continue the discussion, but the mission we have finalized is the one we stick with from now on.

You can read about it here: Be a Builder ❤ Help Improve Wellbeing, Freedom and Society !