What is this?

Tim, could we get some clarification on what this project is about? It seems like it has nothing to do with collaboration anymore. Even in subjects where there had been a lot of discussion and agreement among users in general (religion, for example), all of that is being completely ignored. We're suddenly being presented with entirely new second-level categories devised independently by MLIS students, and are asked to give them feedback on their ideas, while everyone else's ideas have been completely dismissed, without even the briefest acknowledgment that they ever existed.

It seems like this has turned into a little independent school project for a few people, and I don't really see the point anymore.

Zoe, apologies if this is the way we've come across. We all made sure that we DID cover the forums before we started constructing the list, and wanted to make sure that we did take the comments and concerns into consideration. It may seem like a freight train hit the forum with our lists, but I believe that, as students, we wanted to be able to present a more complete version of our ideas (which DID incorporate concerns and ideas in this group) in order to begin participation - jumping in headfirst, if you will. Many people did post their own version of categories. Also, because we did post lists doesn't mean that they are, in any way, complete and uneditable. On the contrary, that's why we posted here. We do have an outside blog that tries to make clear that we're extremely concerned about collaboration. As I mentioned to Suncat in the "A LITERATURE top-level... do we need it?" topic, I want to make clear that we exist only to compliment the work already in progress in the OSC project. My post there:

I mention the group AND link back to the forums here: http://classifyme.blogspot.com/2009/03/l..., in our introduction. I apologize if I wasn't making clear that the outside blog is indeed only a blog to supplement our postings in these forums. Since we're contributing and collaborating with OSC as a project for a degree, we figured it was a good way to keep track of our own progress without disturbing the stream of conversation here, and if someone did want to see our thoughts, they could read the blog.

The Open Shelves Classification project is neither little (even if MLS students are vigorously and enthusiastically working on it) nor independent, as the only way this will succeed is with open minds and mouths.

It sounds good, but I'm really not seeing it. Look at the religion thread. The users there had reached a high degree of consensus weeks ago, and suddenly we're starting from scratch again? Why?

We really need clarification about what everyone's roles are supposed to be. Is the OSC being created by LT members in this forum with the help of guides, or is the forum a place to get feedback from LT members? People have put in a lot of work under the assumption that it was the former. The reassurance that you've taken "the comments and concerns into consideration" certainly doesn't explain the complete disregard for the already-reached consensus in the religion category.

Comfypants, I posted this already in the religion thread, but I wanted to answer you here, as well. Here's what I said (in an answer to Zoe):

Zoe, even though I'm not working on this category, I am interested in the completed list you guys have come up with previously. Is there a way to post it in its entirety? Forgive me for being slow, but the lists that have been posted seem a bit fractured, as they build on previous lists; maybe this is the source of my confusion.

As for your question of role clarification, "Is the OSC being created by LT members in this forum with the help of guides, or is the forum a place to get feedback from LT members?" - I was under the impression that there were no roles, and that the answer is "both."

Comfypants?

What I meant to say was, is the forum only a place to get feedback from LT members? (And I gather your answer to that would be no.)

Imbibo, having contributed extensively to the work on the religions list, I feel that the consensus that had been reached was fairly clear. I find it difficult to see any connection between that consensus and the discussion that had led to it and the list posted by ikus. Though, to be fair, although there were some sources mentioned, the work we had done was not referenced. I do not believe that the thread on the forum had been read before this new proposal was developed.

>6 comfypants: comfypants:

Right! No way we're using this as a feedback-only place. I (mistakenly) thought that it would be best if we jumped in with a lot of preparation, so as not to appear uninformed. Sadly, I'm an idiot. Still, preparation->feedback PLUS revision and collaboration...the way to go, yes?

Speaking for myself, not only did I (and still do) check this place for guidance, but also used LOC, BISAC, a historian, and various museum and university resources to construct a list (the bibliography is long and shambly for me) Unfortunately, history isn't a priority here so I was on my own at first, but all of those sources helped, and continue to do so.

Though I am fairly well informed about certain aspects of some categories, I am faaaaaar from an expert, so I am loath to use only my own personal fount of information as any sort of definitive resource. Any help I can get...As PortiaLong says in his/her profile: "Please feel free to change my mind."