Comments on: Nonprofit 2.0… http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=nonprofit-20 Confessions of a Non-Profit Executive Director Sat, 28 Jan 2012 12:36:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: wikinomics « Nonprofit SaaS http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20/comment-page-1#comment-100970 wikinomics « Nonprofit SaaS Wed, 28 Apr 2010 08:09:50 +0000 http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20#comment-100970 [...] – http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20 (blog for one of the founders of socialmarkets.org); [...] [...] – http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20 (blog for one of the founders of socialmarkets.org); [...]

]]> By: Degreequestion http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20/comment-page-1#comment-100745 Degreequestion Sun, 06 Dec 2009 21:28:10 +0000 http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20#comment-100745 River Enable,mean regard vital dead destroy around violence kind increasingly broad flight only combination hand normal anyone exercise vehicle when sort formal area instruction confidence fee reply desk conclusion park total less matter reflect appropriate pattern these run especially kid background sense lean change hold deny well early make way pretty instance nose literature her focus season error central traditional count support support popular both very creation fee observe possibly since labour cause something count someone tax necessarily size block standard quarter index sound River Enable,mean regard vital dead destroy around violence kind increasingly broad flight only combination hand normal anyone exercise vehicle when sort formal area instruction confidence fee reply desk conclusion park total less matter reflect appropriate pattern these run especially kid background sense lean change hold deny well early make way pretty instance nose literature her focus season error central traditional count support support popular both very creation fee observe possibly since labour cause something count someone tax necessarily size block standard quarter index sound

]]> By: abenamer http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20/comment-page-1#comment-9 abenamer Tue, 21 Mar 2006 03:15:09 +0000 http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20#comment-9 I'll be sharing my thoughts on Web 2.0 in an upcoming post -- right after I finish AJAXifying some old apps we've got kicking around. As a web paradigm -- Web 2.0 as represented by AJAX is very old hat. Take a look at http://www.devx.com/tips/Tip/13969 for a 2000 article on what we now know as AJAX. I wrote what we call an Ajax app myself in 2000 when the XMLHTTPRequest object using Microsoft's introductory documentation on it. I think me and every other Web developer slept on the tech mainly because in 2000, only IE had access to that XMLHTTPRequest object. It seemed like a nice little piece of tech that no one could use. Remote XML requests, CSS compliance, better Javascript event handling, 16-bit color and 800 x 600 or above display resolutions in every browser was just wishful thinking back then. I'm just glad Google revived it. The old tech lead in me loves the tech (despite the hacked together feeling of programming in Javascript's many implementations) but the IT director in me says that this tech highlights a bigger problem that won't be solved by a XML call... I’ll be sharing my thoughts on Web 2.0 in an upcoming post — right after I finish AJAXifying some old apps we’ve got kicking around. As a web paradigm — Web 2.0 as represented by AJAX is very old hat. Take a look at http://www.devx.com/tips/Tip/13969 for a 2000 article on what we now know as AJAX. I wrote what we call an Ajax app myself in 2000 when the XMLHTTPRequest object using Microsoft’s introductory documentation on it. I think me and every other Web developer slept on the tech mainly because in 2000, only IE had access to that XMLHTTPRequest object. It seemed like a nice little piece of tech that no one could use. Remote XML requests, CSS compliance, better Javascript event handling, 16-bit color and 800 x 600 or above display resolutions in every browser was just wishful thinking back then. I’m just glad Google revived it.

The old tech lead in me loves the tech (despite the hacked together feeling of programming in Javascript’s many implementations) but the IT director in me says that this tech highlights a bigger problem that won’t be solved by a XML call…

]]> By: marniewebb http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20/comment-page-1#comment-8 marniewebb Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:02:04 +0000 http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20#comment-8 I'm not sure that web 2.0 is an opportunity for consultants. Much of the interesting stuff that I see has to do with organizations using free tools -- stuff like flickr -- in ways that give them additional capacity (adding photos to a site) that they could not have easily gotten before. In my book, what makes something web 2.0 isn't the buzz words -- it's applications that get better the more that people use them. Like flickr, blogs also become more meaningful the more that people use them as a way to collaborate. I think some of the same things of services like del.icio.us. I’m not sure that web 2.0 is an opportunity for consultants. Much of the interesting stuff that I see has to do with organizations using free tools — stuff like flickr — in ways that give them additional capacity (adding photos to a site) that they could not have easily gotten before. In my book, what makes something web 2.0 isn’t the buzz words — it’s applications that get better the more that people use them. Like flickr, blogs also become more meaningful the more that people use them as a way to collaborate. I think some of the same things of services like del.icio.us.

]]> By: geilhufe http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20/comment-page-1#comment-7 geilhufe Fri, 17 Mar 2006 16:25:00 +0000 http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20#comment-7 "What WOULD make Web 2.0 more useful for NPO is if it meant more unlocked datastores between ASPs that serve non-profits. If several of my ASPs could collaborate via web services so that I could create new functionality by pulling from their datastores, then I think NPOs might listen." I think this is really the issue. Right now, for smaller nonprofits, the NPO ASP providers are about vendor lock in and restricting data to their platforms. Our approach to getting over the "old fashioned greed" is to tackle the problem from a open source perspective with CiviCRM (www.civicrm.org). Salesforce's approach is to look at their service as philanthropy which has a similar effect. We are living in interesting times... how interesting will be determined by how well we can deliver solutions that are relevant to the smallest nonprofits. “What WOULD make Web 2.0 more useful for NPO is if it meant more unlocked datastores between ASPs that serve non-profits. If several of my ASPs could collaborate via web services so that I could create new functionality by pulling from their datastores, then I think NPOs might listen.”

I think this is really the issue. Right now, for smaller nonprofits, the NPO ASP providers are about vendor lock in and restricting data to their platforms.

Our approach to getting over the “old fashioned greed” is to tackle the problem from a open source perspective with CiviCRM (www.civicrm.org). Salesforce’s approach is to look at their service as philanthropy which has a similar effect.

We are living in interesting times… how interesting will be determined by how well we can deliver solutions that are relevant to the smallest nonprofits.

]]> By: abenamer http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20/comment-page-1#comment-5 abenamer Fri, 17 Mar 2006 05:20:54 +0000 http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20#comment-5 Thanks for setting me straight, Mr. Clowder. I think I read your website too quickly and didn't bother to read your bio. Apologies for any misconceptions on my part. I think you're a bit too defensive about your consulting. You do it - that's fine. However, don't be surprised if what you have as the tagline for the first item you list under your blog's Work category ("Salesforce.com consulting for Nonprofits") has the rest of us thinking you're a consultant for Salesforce.com. Perhaps you might want to disambiguate that further on your site. As for Web 2.0 -- sigh. I don't know yet know what it means. If it means Flickr, Google mashups and social bookmarking - I don't quite understand the fuss. The APIs that Yahoo, Microsoft and Google are promoting are pretty exciting but I think it's more evolutionary than revolutionary. And the implications are still very very murky for NPOs except that the programming skills for XML web services, XML-RPC, JSON etc. come at a high price so I doubt actual implementations will come soon except as part of open-source packages. For now, Web 2.0 is clearer as a sales opportunity for fancy pants consultants but not as purchases for your smaller NPO. What WOULD make Web 2.0 more useful for NPO is if it meant more unlocked datastores between ASPs that serve non-profits. If several of my ASPs could collaborate via web services so that I could create new functionality by pulling from their datastores, then I think NPOs might listen. However, as you probably know, the issue is never technical, but political and financial. I don't see how Web 2.0 can overcome old-fashioned greed in that respect. However, I thank you for making your first comment even if I definitely got things wrong on my part. I had hoped the second comment wouldn't be a mea culpa but it is :( Thanks for setting me straight, Mr. Clowder. I think I read your website too quickly and didn’t bother to read your bio. Apologies for any misconceptions on my part.

I think you’re a bit too defensive about your consulting. You do it – that’s fine. However, don’t be surprised if what you have as the tagline for the first item you list under your blog’s Work category (“Salesforce.com consulting for Nonprofits”) has the rest of us thinking you’re a consultant for Salesforce.com. Perhaps you might want to disambiguate that further on your site.

As for Web 2.0 — sigh. I don’t know yet know what it means. If it means Flickr, Google mashups and social bookmarking – I don’t quite understand the fuss. The APIs that Yahoo, Microsoft and Google are promoting are pretty exciting but I think it’s more evolutionary than revolutionary. And the implications are still very very murky for NPOs except that the programming skills for XML web services, XML-RPC, JSON etc. come at a high price so I doubt actual implementations will come soon except as part of open-source packages.

For now, Web 2.0 is clearer as a sales opportunity for fancy pants consultants but not as purchases for your smaller NPO. What WOULD make Web 2.0 more useful for NPO is if it meant more unlocked datastores between ASPs that serve non-profits. If several of my ASPs could collaborate via web services so that I could create new functionality by pulling from their datastores, then I think NPOs might listen. However, as you probably know, the issue is never technical, but political and financial. I don’t see how Web 2.0 can overcome old-fashioned greed in that respect.

However, I thank you for making your first comment even if I definitely got things wrong on my part. I had hoped the second comment wouldn’t be a mea culpa but it is :(

]]> By: sonnycloward http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20/comment-page-1#comment-4 sonnycloward Fri, 17 Mar 2006 02:17:28 +0000 http://www.nonprofittechblog.org/nonprofit-20#comment-4 Cloward here... A couple things...ok more than a couple: In my posting you refer to, I was quoting Marnie Webb from Compumentor, please give her due credit. Second, I am a full time IT/ICT Manager for a national nonprofit...please read bios before making assumptions. Third, Salesforce has nothing to do with this post. There is very little about Salesforce that is Web2.0, expect for their API. Forth, I am a consultant on the side. I don't work for Salesforce, but provide Salesforce consulting to nonprofits. If you read my writing on Salesforce, you will see that I'm not out to sell Salesforce CRM to any poor fool that doesn't know any better. The implications are offensive. Fifth, besides a significant difference in approach and style, I believe we more or less agree on this subject: You're looking at it from an internal/work process POV, while I was approaching it from an external/constituent/client POV. Both are equally important drivers to successfully meeting mission and outcomes. The essence of Marnie's post for me was that web2.0 technologies are (potentially) driving nonprofits to be more transparent and deliver information and programs that provide better personal attention. From that perspective, it creates a certain amount of competition among NPOs (as well as collaboration opportunities) to really step up and provide services that people need. I appreciate your kvetching for the most part, just get your facts straight. Cloward here…

A couple things…ok more than a couple:

In my posting you refer to, I was quoting Marnie Webb from Compumentor, please give her due credit.

Second, I am a full time IT/ICT Manager for a national nonprofit…please read bios before making assumptions.

Third, Salesforce has nothing to do with this post. There is very little about Salesforce that is Web2.0, expect for their API.

Forth, I am a consultant on the side. I don’t work for Salesforce, but provide Salesforce consulting to nonprofits. If you read my writing on Salesforce, you will see that I’m not out to sell Salesforce CRM to any poor fool that doesn’t know any better. The implications are offensive.

Fifth, besides a significant difference in approach and style, I believe we more or less agree on this subject: You’re looking at it from an internal/work process POV, while I was approaching it from an external/constituent/client POV. Both are equally important drivers to successfully meeting mission and outcomes.

The essence of Marnie’s post for me was that web2.0 technologies are (potentially) driving nonprofits to be more transparent and deliver information and programs that provide better personal attention. From that perspective, it creates a certain amount of competition among NPOs (as well as collaboration opportunities) to really step up and provide services that people need.

I appreciate your kvetching for the most part, just get your facts straight.

]]>