Documentation

Thanks Ana. Yes 12:00 is good for me.

Ok, let's do it tomorrow at 12:00! By the moment Ana, Fred and me, I'll write David to see if he can join.

Have a good journey Nicole!

How did this conversation go?

In any case Javier Rodrigo declined to help with facilitation. I'm back in action now so may need to tlak with @malashierbas or @lucastello or @fredericsultan to see what I missed...

Hi @nicoleleonard ! good to have you back :-)
Basically, the discussion has confirmed the objectives to have a video documentation, as it was presented by @lucastello, and to take the opportunity of Madrid to develop the first stones for the toolbox of ECA based on a wikification of the process (workshops and other contents) that will be usefull for the next time for ECA. More details will come with the notes of the meeting by @lucastello.

I have to write a proposal including the minimum needs for the "wikifacation" so we can be clear on what we will be able to achieve with the means available.
We are also waiting information about the connexion with Lunt Foundation, following the exchanges and proposal sent by @david (I am not sure).

@lucastello do you have any notes from this meetign Fred is referencing?

Also, I can't remember, did MediaLab offer screening some of the sessions? Do we know which ones?

As for the Lunt foundation, the last update was a very brief correspondence over email with @davidhammerstein1 on Aug 1 saying they are reading over it and the next meeting is Aug 23. I am worried about not having any other communication between now and then and so left a message offering any additional material next week.

I need some advice... how to make sure this goes through without being too pushy? I'm just hesitant because there have been other Lunt meetings where ECA was supposed to be brought up but they didn't get to it and if it happens this time it will be too late! @sophie40

Following our call on Wednesday 13/9 between Ana, Gaelle, and me:

VIDEOS
-We agreed that someone from the coordination team needs to accompany the video director. We aren’t clear on who yet. Lucas said Gabriel Pecot, partner of Julio who is producing video of Transeuropa, can maybe do it. Ana is also following this up. We want to request some of the ECF budget for this. Ana is reporting back on about how much would be needed.
-We agreed that we MUST have a meeting in early October- so the 6th, or that week, for the different components of documentation and facilitation to meet together.
-We think that instead of one longer video, 3 shorter videos on certain themes would be better. This might be more costly in terms of scripting so we will see. They could also align with the workshop themes.

Graphic reporting: Group sessions, workshops

• There was some debate here on what is most useful. More people getting involved in our conversation would help decide! :)

• Right now, we are thinking: Relatograma graphics produced for plenary sessions (2), and short texts for workshops. But there is some resistance to this because we worry recapitulative texts will not end up being useful (see “Alternative Proposal” below.

• Lucas says Pablo Navarro from Zemos can perhaps do graphics. But we need to discuss more. In any case, yes ECF budget is needed.

• In theory, this could also maybe include post production on matrix. Most of the matrix activity work would go along with facilitation being provided from MediaLab (still looking to Ana for more clarification). But to design and make it shareable in the end, this would require some additional post work, funds, and a separate skill set - Ana said something like 800. I’m not sure we can fund that too in addition, with this ECF budget. We may have to try later to see if there are leftover funds.

"Alternative" Proposal:

To me the ideal is a bit different than what is described above - but we are somewhat limited with resources. Gaelle emphasized it would be great to have one "documentation" output for each workshop and leaving some space for the groups themselves to determine the content of this - so that they can in a way create their own “tools”, i.e. these documentation outputs. This is more in line with what we had in mind originally for the ECA process.

I think it’s quite important - but they don’t have to be just recaps of conversation, but narrowed down to act more as a tool for a specific aspect of the theme. The conversations we start to introduce within groups at the end of next week will help with this "narrowing down”.

We could create a quota system and allocate one FORM (so graphic, text, video) of documentation output on each workshop, based on what they come up with:

E.g.
- 3 short thematic videos
- 2 graphics
- 2 texts
= 7 workshops.

[+ ideally one graphic output (Relatograma) of Thursday PM session]

We would need to talk to Zemos more, it is too bad they weren’t in the call.

Matrix:
Post production on matrix - maybe: most of the matrix work would go along with facilitation being provided from MediaLab (still looking to Ana for more clarification on what this would concretely entail). But to design and make it shareable in the end, this would require some additional post work, funds, and a separate skill set. I think we may have extra funds and suggest we treat this, as well as follow up comms and distribution work, separately.

Semantic Wiki

Still unclear how it fits in. In any case, we have a budget from MediaLab for accommodation and travel that could potentially cover the proposal. So we need to still see details but no need to include it in ECF.
Maybe Gaelle’s recommendation idea below can fit in here, or in the facilitation with Medialab.

So, ECF Proposal

I will wait to hear final feedback today from Gaelle and Ana; but I propose we go forward with the 3k ECF proposal as follows, because no matter what we end up deciding it will be some mix of the forms we already proposed: Video, texts, and graphics:

1.3k Video
300 (3 texts with formatting)*
1.4k graphics*

*Maybe we can combine these into once category and see the distribution later.

Hi,

Thanks Nicole for the report.

I just sent a proposal via email, I copy it here. Please, note that the video part is a bit tricky, as we depend quite a lot on the Medialab. I am sure we can manage to get a format that covers the needs within the available resources (that are not much), but I would leave it to Cemos to think how this can be done, as they have the expertise :)

···················

As we agreed on Wednesday, here I send a reference for documentation costs, as discussed with Lucas, Julio and Patricia (she is also in copy):

_ Video _ 1000€ (This part of the budget could cover the script of the piece and direction of the interviews, in coordination with someone from the ECA coordination team).

I have asked Patricia about the possibility of doing 2-3 videos, and the content/format. As she can explain in detail, the format is quite fixed and corresponds to the examples she has sent before: interviews with more or less 10 people that explain what has happened (and why, and with whom) in during the ECA plus general images from the workshops that will be edited into one single video piece. Nevertheless, the full interviews and all the images will be available for re-use.

_ Relatogramas (graphic description) of collective discussion on Thursday afternoon and Friday morning_ 200€ each. Total 400€

_ Graphic postproduction of Matrices _ 100€ each workshop + 2 cross-over _ Total 900€

(Ideally, this two pieces of graphic work could be done by the same person)

_ Articles based on the workshops _ 100€ each _ Total 700€

As also suggested by Nicole, Lucas thinks we could create a template to help to recolect the information.

Total: 3.000€

Hello,

From the point of view of the ECA, one aspect that is missing in the discussion about "documentation", it is the targeting of politics and policies.
It's the key element and added value of ECA – what is making it different from just being a network among other networks. And defines why we go to Madrid and why we organize the workshops, the plenary and other meetings and should drive our "productions".

It was very present in our work before, during and after Brussels. It is in our call and design to have commoners to participate in all policies, to promote, develop, strengthen commons. We called upon governments, local and national across Europe, and of course European Union institutions to favor, protect, etc commons, but our way to get them to do that is to actively push what the movement is concertely doing in the form of proposals – through the interactions we organize (Brussels, Madrid, etc) and in the public space.

What we call "documentation" to my understanding is more in fact "production" than pure recording of what is happening.

From the point of view of the ECA I think it make more sense to have one "production" per workshop. In line with what we did in Brussels : concrete proposals from commoners for each theme discussed. Because that is really something that is missing in the public space. It is more useful for the general public who needs to understand what are the existing possibilities, as well as for the policies makers and politicians, rather than general messaging about the commons.

That why, even if it is a little more or different work technically, having 3 short videos on 3 of the themes from the workshop seems better to me than one general one.
We have 7 workshops. When we start discussing with the participants ahead of the meeting in Madrid we can make plans about what it should be for each workshop (I think we will start next week some discussions about the workshops concretely).
- Participatory Tools for Democracy
- Law for the Commons
- Currencies and financing of commons
- Right to the City (Public Space and Urbanism, Housing, Water & Energy)
- Data commons and the collaborative city
- Solidarity as a commons: Migrants and Refugees
- Embodied productions of commoning: Food, Health, and Leisure
Maybe Right to the City, Embodied productions of commoning and another one are the best for videos. But that's just my opinion.
On solidarity I have a suggestion to discuss with the participants.
Some may want some slide shows. Or an infographic.

Of course 3k is not much in terms of money. Maybe we can find a little more to cover our needs, together with the matrix doucmentation. Also, some other organizations (from which belong the participants) may be ok to contribute to the "productions".

Here is a copy of the message sent in the coordinaition list :

Dear all,
First, I'm sorry that I was not able to react more quickly and that I was not available for last week's discussions on documentation. I think there is a lack of understanding between us on this issue. This may be due to our different ways of working or cultures. So, I share with you some thoughts on this.
Remix the commons (Yves Otis and I), we propose to put ourselves at the service of the process. Our proposal is not an addition to the process, but to put us at the service of the documentation of the meeting and ECA. Our proposal aims to constitute a memory for the action of ECA. It is about collecting the tangible and intangible elements of the meeting and linking them with what has already been shared in ECA. By this we mean:
- Enhance the knowledge of ECA members
- extend and reinforce the network of relations of the actors involved in ECA
- the decisions taken in the workshops
- identify and link the projects and productions,
- to make the important points of the discussions more visible, to keep the traces of consensus
- ...
For this to work, documentation must be integrated into the workshops as a form of work useful to the participants. The idea of ​​harvesting should be an integral part of facilitation. This is not an independent documentation process. It is not an "external service" that will produce something separate or ask the participants to produce something in addition to what they are already doing during the workshops and the meeting in Madrid.
This makes it necessary to be clear about the expectations of the meeting: to name the expectations with participants and not to superimpose different productions: results of the workshop, diagnosis via the matrix and wiki-documentation. What we are proposing is not an approach imposed on participants to gather reports of summaries at the end of each session as an imposed exercise. This would not serve any purpose and risk to turn ECA into a bureaucratic system.
One of the questions is to know what this produces as "final object". The production of this documentation will be a knowledge database on ECA that will enable us to work on useful tools for ECA. For example, this corresponds to Zeljko's proposal this morning.
The studio proposal was a source of misunderstanding because it seems to imply a space with a lot of technical equipment. There is no need for technical equipment. We already have what is needed. But what we need is a space to work with the participants to harvest the meeting : to be able to process and enrich the elements produced by the workshops with the participants. Documentation is not possible without the participation of those present.
Finally, if our proposal does not appear clear and useful for ECA or if it does not meet the expectations of the group, we do not want to impose a such approach.
Best