[Peers] what's in it for you?

[Kevin Turner]

Not too long ago, I was reading questions on StackOverflow, the sort
of questions openhatch is built to answer ("What project should I
contribute to?"), although I didn't know about openhatch at the time.
And I thought of another angle that might help.

There are certain filters we apply readily enough.  Application domain
(Games?  Multimedia production?  Hyperdistributed cloud
superintelligence?), skill set (Code monkey?  Human-computer
interaction?  Technical writer?), technology choice (Haskell?
Android?  Anything But PHP?).  And all the information necessary to
figure that out is pretty readily available on project pages or by
Trove classification.

But something that's missing from all that is being able to identify
what contributors get out of it.  What is it about working on that
project that appeals to them?

Here are some examples I might give:

* One thing about the GIMP is that it lets people be creative.  And
  maybe, through one of these crazy filters, people are able to
  express something they couldn't have otherwise.  Or restore a photo
  that might have been lost.  And there's joy in that too, in seeing
  an image take shape.
  [creativity self-expression joy]

* This testing tool is about giving developers feedback, about helping
  them be confident in their work.  And about taking some of the
  hassle out of the testing process, having it just happen and be easy
  to do.
  [confidence ease]

* The thing I like about working with the Twisted team is their
  committment to producing really top-notch work.  When a patch makes
  it through the review process there, I know it's a piece of code I
  can count on.  And I know my skills as a programmer have grown a lot
  in working with them.
  [teamwork count-on-ability(dependability) growth]

* I think the work we did at OpenID Enabled was about making something
  happen that wouldn't have happened without us.  Giving webmasters a
  way to seperate "authenticate this user" from the details of *how*
  they do that with a particular type of credentials lets us explore
  so many options beyond repeatable passwords.  And I think that,
  ultimately, that's going to provide people with more security.  Both
  end-users, in having an authentication provider that meets their
  needs, and application developers, when they don't have to worry
  about not offering the right credential management system.
  [innovation security]


Does that make sense?  Does it seem valuable to talk about how people
relate to projects in that way?

I was also thinking, that since this is about building community and
perhaps about putting a human face on the people involved, it might
help people connect if these sorts of testimonials were shared in
video form, youtube-style.  I think you'd want to keep them *real*
short, because you want people to be able to browse these pretty
quickly.

Whaddya think?

 - Kevin


(...hmm.  I think that the above examples ended up being in
chronological order for me, and they seems to get more buzzwordy as time
goes on.  Huh.)