A Canadian discussion on how to use, improve, and share within the larger GovLoop Community (but open to everyone!).
A great place to start when looking to connect with other Canadian Civil Servants.
Should We Build a Unique Site Or Use Govloop?
September 23, 2009 at 8:13 pm #81294
September 23, 2009 at 8:23 pm #81348
So many of our issues are the same, I would like to see Canadians stay within the govloop community. Sure we have some relevant differences of law and regulation, but so does the U.S., from state to state.
September 23, 2009 at 8:35 pm #81346
I think there’s value to being connected to the larger GovLoop community – it should help share ideas more broadly and bring some of our US (and global) colleagues into the conversation…. and help promote Canada as a leader in Gov 2.0 innovations 🙂
We definitely need a Canadianized look and feel / brand though, eh?
September 23, 2009 at 9:09 pm #81344
Given we have a Canadian Government 2.0 group already established on Govloop I think there’s not doubt the interest is there.
I see the true benefit of Govloop being that it is international in flavour. The dialogues, groups and connections counter the notion that government issues are unique to that one country being. Govloop to me represents the absolute best of, and for gov2.0.
Given GCConnex seems stalled, GCPedia is unique in it’s function and the fact that more and more departments are trying to create this type of environment, it’s time for those in Canada trying to establish these networks to borrow a wheel, not reinvent it. Having a GSA with Ning, among others, certainly helps.
I hope the other GoC’ers in the CDN group comment on this as well.
September 23, 2009 at 9:37 pm #81342
I like the idea of using this as a proof of concept to try stuff out unofficially. Unless there are too many of these floating around… I only know of GCConnex and we’ve never been able to log in from my network.
Govloop looks like a simple way to test out the uptake, with zero investment (other than time). Not to mention, since there are 200 other groups, we can lurk around and learn from them…
September 24, 2009 at 1:15 am #81340
I kinda feel that way too, but its a lot more work and in a sense we would be competing w/govloop. The infrastructure is here, I am leaning towards carving out a space.
September 24, 2009 at 1:15 am #81338
I completely agree. If I knew what was involved I would start working on a new skin right now …
September 24, 2009 at 1:17 am #81336
Thanks Martha – I have already left a note on that group asking people to come here and weigh in. We need to rally people and resources if we want to get this off the ground. I agree about not reinventing the wheel.
September 24, 2009 at 1:18 am #81334
We have to get them to change that logo image, though. Or it’s 1812 all over again. Just sayin…
September 24, 2009 at 1:19 am #81332
One of the interesting things about going this route is that since no government organization is running this, we technically do not need to adhere to any of the policy frameworks that make projects like GCConnex difficult to administer. However I would argue that we should do our best to promote bilingualism and web accessibility while ensuring that no protected information is being shared.
September 24, 2009 at 1:20 am #81330
I agree that we share similar issues and a lot could be learned from each other by staying under one umbrella.
September 24, 2009 at 1:42 am #81328
No, we don’t need the skin, but it would be nice to have. I envision something similar to the default skin but w/red and parliament buildings, mounties, etc. But than again I am a patriot ;p
September 24, 2009 at 1:43 am #81326
Do you mean the group logo or the skin for the whole network? You don’t like the group logo? I tossed it up there myself…
September 24, 2009 at 1:48 am #81324
No, no, that’s fine. And “Gov Loop” with the arrows is fine. I mean the capitol building on every page…
September 24, 2009 at 2:31 am #81322
I just spent a few minutes revamping the logo for the group, thoughts? I can try to stylize something for the header …
September 24, 2009 at 2:45 am #81320
If the purpose of Gov loop north is to engage in open collaboration across jurisdictions and with vendors then I would say it makes sense to use the existing platform. I agree with the comments about branding and the skin however, something with a more Canadian or even international flavor would be nice for us non-Americans.
In the end my guess is that here will be a variety of networks, some purely Canadian, some within States and Provinces and even departments and agencies. They will serve variety of purposes and use different technologies. What would be very cool is if we could work out a way for them to be interoperable in some way.
September 24, 2009 at 2:56 am #81318
I would see us getting the most value out of having a corner on govloop, not establishing a separate entity
September 24, 2009 at 4:05 am #81316
The proposed Govloop North could only benefit from using Govloop as its backbone/platform. A unique/seperate site would only help to build silos and likely would introduce new challenges.
I’d like to see a skin representing our home and native land be used too…I can’t stand being assimilated by our friendly neighbours to the south.
September 24, 2009 at 9:20 am #81314
I think there are profound challenges for us as Canadians. Concerns about the Patriot Act, collection and distrbution of personal information, policy restrictions and the differences in information ownership between the two countries may be deeply limiting. In discussions about the concept of a Canadian Public Service based social network among experts in BC there has been much concern that due to the specifications of BC’s Freedom of Information Protection of Privacy Act, BC Public servants could risk real and strong sanctions, including fines, for participating.
September 24, 2009 at 1:26 pm #81312
As I said in another thread, are these concerns real? This is a social networking site like any other, public servants are equally liable vis-a-vis those responsibilities across all platforms. I don’t see this being any different than linked in or facebook in that regard.
Am I mistaken?
September 24, 2009 at 2:18 pm #81310
it all depends on how flexible govloop is re: skinning and default interfaces. can we create a canadianized skin (bilingual, correct spelling of colour, parliament instead of state buildings in pics, etc) with “can-con” if you will displayed by default to those who choose the “canadian” skin, but that allows members to freely access the whole of govloop?
if govloop is flexible enough to let us do that, then I think we can stay in govloop. if not, we may want to build our own (heck, we could use ning too and everyone would use the same account).
it’s really a question for the govloop people, what will they let us do?
(btw: I see this as a great opp for govloop, we could set an example that would help all sorts of skins of govloop happen, imagine govloop europe or govloop africa, etc all the same site but the regional focus allows gov’t workers in their regions to focus on their issues, and collaborate across jurisdictions at will).
September 24, 2009 at 2:40 pm #81308
ok so govloop ate my edit.
was going to add that even a simple international skin for govloop would make me happy. I’ve known about govloop since it first started but never joined simply because of the seeming america-focus. i’m not interested in american politics or government, so i never joined. simple as that
September 24, 2009 at 3:12 pm #81306
Good to see this discussion.
1. I am all for saving money and time, that is why I love the open source movement. We should use these programs and hire G of C coders to help improve it instead of paying huge $$$ for software contracts. The coders improve the software and provide support within government. Why not do the same with Open Office and the like? (Audacity, GIMP2 etc.) The government looks awesome for helping develop a free, full-function word processor that any Canadian can use.
2. The only issues I foresee would be privacy issues as more mainstream work moves on here. Draft directives and policy on an external site would ruffle some feathers and could possibly affect international negotiations. Obviously education is key as I am sure even the lowest level security can not come on here.
3. Your logo is awesome, I like it a lot.
Keep it up Nick
September 24, 2009 at 4:00 pm #81304
good point tariq
September 25, 2009 at 7:11 pm #81302
Now I don’t want to come across as a big – we have privacy issues naysayer. I’m personally torn. I participate in nearly all the US Gov 2.0 forums I can get my hands on. Public Servants in the US are taking an amazing lead in moving into Web 2.0 tools, and I think there are many valuable lessons to be learned. Maybe our own corner of GovLoop could work. What would it look like?
I’d prefer not to reinvent the wheel either. However, maybe a related space that met our privacy and security needs?
September 28, 2009 at 7:57 pm #81300
It makes sense to use Govloop. It’s already developed, and the current level of discussion/conversation doesn’t warrant putting resources into creating a new system. Perhaps in the future there will be a need for a more robust system. I also think Govloop North doesn’t really convey much of a distinct identity — do you think of the Northern regions of the province you live in (or Northern USA), national gov’ts of Northern countries, Alaska.
October 5, 2009 at 3:20 pm #81298
I can’t log in to GCconnex from NRC either, so it’s nice to be able to have a place I can access.
October 18, 2009 at 1:40 pm #81296
Yikes. GCconnex is stalled?! Please join the weekly conference call on Tuesday and tell me more. We are sending a survey out to all members this week to get feedback and try to see how keep the momentum and keep moving forward.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.