Hi Tom, I am sorry to read this news. I have valued much that I have learned from you, here and elsewhere. Ironic to think that my involvement here is sole product of an ON-supported gathering in New York two years ago that you hosted, just as the site was launching. I remember your enthusiasm for the potential of the site to both incubate and launch ideas for making the world a better place, in particular through media and philanthropy.

I guess my question for you is, what has shifted in your mind about this space? I understand the financing constraints, and that not of us are here with a sense of entitlement beyond the purpose of making this space the best it can be. Clearly it is not that space for you. O.net is neither the "attractor" network nor the "snowflake" inducing environment you envisioned early in the life of this space. What, with no kidskin gloves, is missing for you?

With my deepest, sincerest thanks for all you have contributed here (and with looking forward to engaging you elsewhere), and regrets only at your departure from O.net.

Lars

Lars, I'm not ignoring you, just thinking... will respond in a bit.

Very sad to see you go Tom. Very. Tom going/gone and Sue gone. Both incredibly depressing. As I've said before, you are quite literally the reason I am here... you introduced me to this place. I am indebted to you for getting me involved in a place where I have met so many great people, and forged so many real world friendships.

Along with Lars, thank you for all you've done here, and all your work you've done and are doing to make the world a better place. While I know I will connect with you in other forums and face to face, you will be missed by myself and many others in this forum.

Now more than ever...

Be well.

Mark

PS. Am dropping some points on this thread not because it is "positive" so to speak, but so others see it as well.

I agree with Lars and Mark that we're sad to see you go, Tom. I'm sure this has been a difficult decision to make, and I appreciate your announcing your departure instead of simply fading away.

You've acted as a great connector to a lot of folks who otherwise would never have met, your energy and enthusiasm for sharing in this space (and elsewhere) helped set a tone that others continue to follow, and your tenacious quest for understanding what it all means and how we can insert uplift into everything we do is inspiring (and always will be).

Thanks for all you've done, and all you'll continue to do, here and elsewhere.

Tom, I appreciate your presence here -- and I dis-appreciate your absence. In other words: I'm happy when I see you post, and I'm sad when I feel you are not "willing to post". I put that in quotes because I acknowledge that you have put alot of energy/effort into this project.

All that said, I do need to also express that I am upset about something. I really think it is superfluous to say "I'm leaving". I understand all this interest in exit interviews, but I also heard a podcast on "Ideacast" (HBR) recently where someone suggested "staying interviews" would make more sense -- as in : how are you doing? What would help you to stay more integrated? etc.

There is no either/or, I think. People come, people go -- there is vacillation. Saying "I'm out" just sounds like pouting to me. On the contrary: Saying "I'm back" is wonderful -- like the prodigal son (well, let's keep "sin" out of it ;). Stuff happens, a break is in order (I will also have to be more absent for a couple weeks [for personal reasons]).

So I'm not gonna be happy about this. I think it really sucks that you say you're leaving (mostly because I think it sucks that you're leaving). I wish we could have "staying interviews" instead of exit interviews. Exiting is less painful with "no strings attached". That's what I think (and of course I already kinda expect everyone to gang up on me for saying so). Let's just see what happens after I click "save"....

;) nmw

Tom Munnecke said:

.... I've decided not to discontinue my active participation on omidyar.net.

I went and checked the date (I was petty sure April 1 was long past). Last I checked, not dis continue meant continue.

Linda Nowakowski said:

Tom Munnecke said:

.... I've decided not to discontinue my active participation on omidyar.net.

Last I checked, not dis continue meant continue.

Good point, Linda -- I think we've nailed him!

;D nmw

Tom, it was your cat, snowflake, toaster discussions that first made me realize that this place was more than just a meet and greet online hub. I got my first a-ha! reading your posts. And I realized that the people on o.net were not only weird, but smart, passionate and weird -- my favorite!

And while I've missed digesting your slow conversations over the past year as you've slowly pulled away, it's no big deal -- as long as your thoughts are available somewhere, and we've got a chance to interact with you. Whether it's your own blog or just lunch at Poseidon, that's fine by me.

Peace, you smart, passionate and weird old man!

yes! Tom is going to not discontinue...

"I've decided not to discontinue my active participation"

oh boy. I’m confused.

Tom ? Freudian Slip? or Simple Typo?

Just to clear things up, I believe that Tom meant to say that he has not not decided to not discontinue his inactive active participation.

Thanks for clarifying. :-)

Exit interview question for Tom--What was one of the most useful "things" about this community for you?

Hey Tom, when we met the first time in New York, you left me a copy of the Rubaiyat, which I have long loved. Re-read it tonight, found this:

The Worldly Hope men set their Hearts

upon

Turns Ashes -- or it prospers; and anon,

Like Snow upon the Desert's dusty Face,

Lighting a little hour or two -- is gone.

You have been an inspiration here and will continue to be an inspiration. You have inspired me and revealed something of what may be possible. My best wishes to you, and I hope and trust that you can continue to serve in the creation of the powerful emergent forms you envision!

Hugs and good rhythms!

Rory

In my view, Tom is not leaving, he is still networking (thanks for the contact address), still working for a better world, still with us in spirit, he is just going to be doing his magic in a broader community.

OK, in the spirit of slow conversations, I'll respond to some of these comments.

Lars: (and others)... yes, I value our friendship(s) greatly, and look forward to continue them in the many other overlapping networks in which we find ourselves. And thanks for reminding me of the book from New York... I forgot the gift tradition at my last workshop, now I realize what was missing. Re: the poem: Kayyam obviously wasn't aware of benegnostic autocatalytic spaces and the snowflake model of global transformation. I'll put this on my list of windmills to tilt.

Norbert: I agree that this sucks...and would gladly just ignore things. I have put a tremendous amount of time and effort and enthusiasm into supporting o.net, and don't want to "exit badmouthing." At the same time, I have to say that I feel greater attachmemt to those who didn't stay with the network than those who have stayed. I would hope that my comments serve to improve things for the future.

re: My supposed Freudian slip comment, "I've decided not to discontinue my participation." probably reflects my inner conflict over my participation here... but the overt intention was to gracefully announce my "inactive" status while respecting my obligations to report back on progress on my community-funded grant.

re: Jane's wonderful question about "useful things about this community" let me break this into two parts: "useful things" and "this community."

I'll start with "community." Suppose that Lars and I meet in a coffee shop and strike up a friendshop, and I see this as a "friend of Lars" relationshop. The shop manager, however, decides that we are now members of the "Starbuckers community." I don't necessarily want to be a Starbucker, nor do I want the shop manager telling me that I am being "elitist" for sitting off in a corner talking to my friend in quiet conversation, instead of joing the Starbucker table and participating in "open" conversations. If Lars and I go off to another coffee shop to continue the conversation, I don't want this to be frowned upon as a "backchannel" conversation to the Starbucker community ethic. Somehow, the Starbucker manager's view of "community" has trumped my ability to relate to my friends. Over time, the folks who accept this model stick around the coffee shop, and those who don't accept it wander off. The Starbucker manager holds a hard line on his viewpoint: "It's my way or the highway," and validates his perspective with the small but enthusiastic community that he has gathered.

I came to o.net thinking that it was a network, not a community. I had envisioned tying together a "network of networks" through shared infrastructure and technology, not a single, centralized community imposing its particular values on its "members."

re: Jane's questions about "most useful things" I can vividly point to the peak of my early relationship with the Omidyar Foundation (precursor to the Omidyar Network). I was given a grant from the Omidyar Foundation in conjunction with my fellowship at Stanford's Digital Visions Program to build a prototype to test:

"whether intra- and extra-community network dynamics can be enhanced by the creation of an Internet-based system for collaboration, complementary currency, and focus on areas of "uplift" as opposed to more typical media-driven discourse of problems and emergencies. At the completion of the project, The Foundation will have a living example of network dynamics and Inform, Inspire, and Engage through a technical foundation."

This was an absolutely amazing time, talking with Larry Lessig about the Creative commons and open society, Sergey Brin and his obsession with scale at Google, Doug Engelbart and his frustrations getting his visions accepted since inventing the mouse, Larry Harvey and his experiences with gift economies and the dynamics of building the Burning Man community, and many, many others. I held a series of design workshops with well over 100 folks from many divergent disciplines. Matt Hamilton, then of the Omidyar Foundation, participated in the workshops and many late-night discussions about open source software. I used the Omidyar logo on my workshops with their permission, and had what I thought was a very close, productive relationship with them. We built a prototype based on a complementary currency (Thankyous), a positive-only reputation system (Aha!s), a social network for referral, authentication, and member-controlled revelation of personal information (Friendly Favors, now Living Directory), and the use of a Wiki as the underlying storage medium.

The Foundation was dissolved into the Omidyar Network, funding for the effort was terminated, Matt left the organization, and the web site crashed. (Here is the Internet Archive of it, showing a portion of what it was). I had some difficult financial reversals, and was unable to support this on my own funds. I had a mailing list that was boiling over with enthusiasm, but I didn't have the technical infrastructure to support it.

Then Omidyar.net appeared. I thought it was a continuation of the work we had begun, but was a little surprised to find no mention of our previous activities. I thought that it was a "good enough" platform to get started, and thought that the previous open systems model would continue. Based on these assumptions, I tried to transfer my activities over to omidyar.net, thinking that we could continue the activities and gather additional momentum with new ideas and faces.

Unfortunately, this didn't work. 95% of the folks chose not to move to the new platform. 100% of new folks I referred to omidyar.net chose not to stay. The more effort I put into omidyar.net, the less support I got. Instead of the warm partnership of years past, I feel disrespected and subjected to back channel derogatory comments by Thomas. Instead of being proud to be a participant of omidyar.net, I find myself at being embarassed by the association (at the recent WikiMania conference, I overheard a conversation describing Omidyar in the most unflattering terms, which I won't repeat). I've been refused even modest support of my worshops and pretty much told that there is no prospect for future relationships.

So, faced with this ongoing degradation of our relationship, and what I consider disrespect by o.net staffers, I have to reluctantly say that it's time for me to move on.

I have the greatest respect for what the Omidyars are trying to accomplish, and would gladly participate if there are any future opportunities under more respectful circumstances. But I simply can't enthusiastically participate in the current environment that is being shaped by omidyar.net staff...

I have many dangling threads of discussions that I'll occasionally track, as well as specific obligations regarding the nanofinance project that I will follow through on.

I continue to value the many relationships I've built over the years on omidyar.net, and am eager to continue them. I might point out that I make many, many relationships over the network. The quality of these relationships is in the linking itself, not the specific space we first met. But the Starbucker manager has superimposed a "It's my way or the highway" ethic on our relationships, so I must reluctantly take the highway. I am somewhat befuddled as to why this turned out this way, but I look forward to wherever else this takes us.

As pioneers we hold emotional attachments to our visions of what something can become. When it becomes what it is and it looks different, that can be painful. But there is no need for pain in it.

The online world is changing and WE are changing because that's what we who convene here try to do as a hobby. It's not the places and spaces we hold onto that really matter in this cyber world we are building, but the impact we make; what we share and what we learn; what we make happen and the reputation we earn while we are there.

but there are no obligations - neither on the part of any active user or on the part of the Onet community (or the Omidyar Network) to satisfy every user's evolving needs. Onet is what it is and we have made it what it is with relatively little support from the Omidyar Network. I think we've accomplished quite a lot in the world as a community working together over the past year+. That doesn't mean any of us are beholden to continue being 100% on at Onet. On the contrary. We of all people need to be able to let each other go without any rancor whatsoever.

Tom, I would like to ask on behalf of many who regularly hang out here at Onet, that you feel free and welcome at any time to pop in and update us about the happenings in your life and projects. You will always be welcome among us and find fans for your Better World Building concepts and ideas. No exit interview is required.

Thanks for sharing your side of the story with us, Tom.

I think this is what many expected to see when you started this thread and Jean posted her direct question.

Tom,

I'm sad to see you leave, I have learned much from your contributions here! ,and I think I understand the frustrations that can occur from both sides of the community here, from the community as well as from Omidyar Network staff, for we all are really trying to figure out how this whole thing can work for the betterment of the world.

Often I imagine myself in ON's shoes, (ie. I have capital and I want to help, but not sure how to involve an open community best, I tried to experiment with the showcase project, yet it turned into a mess! ) so what is the best or even a good plan?

I believe that this is what ONet at large is looking for, a good plan! yet a working one has yet to be discovered as of yet, and I believe one or more will show up eventually, but until then I think everyone is just trying to make the most of what we have :)

Best Wishes Tom :) and I hope to see you back once new and better ideas have been uncovered! or even sooner!

B

hi, i'm confused...

you said "I've decided not to discontinue my active participation on omidyar.net."

which would imply you are NOT leaving... unless i am worse at english grammar than i thought...

but all the posts seem to address you ARE leaving..

was this a typo?

i don't know how to respond.

thanks tom, and see you around. and yes, the gift tradition is important. cheers.

Hey Tom, I totally understand your perspective. I know how much time and energy you have put to this, and I share (in many ways) your disappointment in the network. I remember the day several years ago where both of us were very excited about the possibility of the network, and could see this being a valuable network where reputation meant something and where ordinary people could submit a good idea, and get support for that idea -- both from the community and from ON. I too got very excited about this vision, and think Pierre did as well in the early days. I also remember the day you got to 100 points (the first in the community. It seemed like so many points back then! I think I had about 25 at the time. I never thought I would get to 100!)

I am not sure why Onet did not reach the vision and excitement many of us had back then. Brad mentioned the Showcase. Yes, that was tons of work, then flop. People kept posting proposals but after several months of nothing getting any funding, it lost steam. So why have so many of our efforts here not worked? While other sites have prospered, why hasn't Onet? Why does Pierre no longer participate (I think it has been something like 7-8 months since he has posted. I know he is busy but he has always been busy and used to find the time, but now does not.) What was the goal of it? It certainly could not have been to spend more in staff salaries then on community giving, which seems to be the case now. I do not know what the initial goal was, but I would guess that Pierre had other visions of this too. And I agree that in terms of ON funding, it is much easier and better to not be on the network and I know some people in the online world do not think of it highly of Onet; however, there are still good people here.

So while I am not going to try to talk you out of leaving, and you must go where your energy is, my suggestion would be to just stay open. I spend much much less time here then I used to, but I like to participate selectively, particularly in the Food Chain. And I would not being doing what I am now if not for Onet. I have learned a great deal.

There could eventually emerge something very cool here, so instead of saying bye, maybe just step back for awhile, and see what emerges. I know how much time and energy you have put to this, and I am sorry that so much of that effort that you put in did not move forward and the people you invited here did not stay. I am sorry your excitement and vision did not materialize as you hoped. Maybe, however, there is learning for you (and me) in dissappointment and failure (kind of a strong word, but it seems relevant) as well as success.

Soren Gordhamer said:

So why have so many of our efforts here not worked?

Lots of interesting questions, Soren. When I give answers (like suggesting to use FIFO accounting for feedback), Thomas tends to say to me: go start your own network! Wow, that's very supportive -- I do not know any of these new-fangled scripting languages for sh*t.

Well, that is my simple answer. omidyar.net is drowning in legacy -- and legacy is not very dynamic. Instead it's like a ball and chain. And what bubbles up are dreams and aspirations -- while reality sinks like a stone.

Sorry about the negativity -- I'm just venting, I guess....

;D nmw

Why does Pierre no longer participate (I think it has been something like 7-8 months since he has posted. I know he is busy but he has always been busy and used to find the time, but now does not.)

I think it's more noteworthy that Pam continues to participate. For me that speaks more than the fact that Pierre doesn't.