Help with the Handbook, please! Small scale vs large scale efficiency

Hello Edgeryders.

A full draft of the Edgeryders Handbook is nearing completion and, to get it finished, I’d appreciate some help.

I want to incorporate a few more examples from the platform to illustrate some of the key points that are being made.  I’ve read a pretty large proportion of the mission reports (about two thirds of all those posted), but, because of the sheer number it’s been hard to remember the finer points of some of them.  So, I’m going to post a few missions like this where I outline some topics where I’d appreciate a nudge towards the most relevant content.

Here are a few to get started:

  1. Examples, please, of circumstances in which a small group of individuals have made something happen far faster than a large, sluggish institution which was aiming for the same ends.  [Spaghetti Open Data is the first example that came to my mind, but I’m sure there are more…]

  2. Examples of when Edgeryders’ projects have sought institutional funding but were turned down because they were deemed ‘too risky’ or ‘too innovative’.

  3. Examples of bad experiences in trying to forge productive working relationships with institutions.  Has anyone entered into a working partnership with an institution only to have been let down badly?  [I think I recall a mission report by Involute Conduit which touched on this…]

Please post your suggestions as comments and I’ll incorporate as many as I can.


Oh god…

My entire life is one long string of these events… I’m historically almost entirely impossible to fund, even though most of my work is directly related to keeping people safe in natural disasters. Pearltrees has almost entirely been built on my own time and money.

How much detail do you need, and what kind of examples are you looking for specifically? The tale of how was refused funding in 2009 is a particularly good one.

Anecdotes more than detail…

Hi Vinay,

Thanks for your response.

I guess I’m in search of brief anecdotes rather than a lot of detail, since I need to boil each example down to 2-3 lines of description, plus perhaps a good quote.

What I’m looking for is examples of projects where institutions are fully sold on the principles of the project and/or they agree with the need that drives it*, but their conservatism and boxed-in thinking when it comes to solutions means that they would rather not solve the problem than take a risk on an innovative solution.

*This is important because in some instances it is simply ideological differences that constitute the barrier thart means funding is denied.

So, any examples along these lines would be great.  Thank you!


HELP :slight_smile:

3)Help the year was 2007 new policies from bottom to top, we offer farmers a small local development plan, the Lombardy region and the European Commission DG Agriculture accept him for the nomination, was a simple and workable innovative rural development plan. 2 years, talks between the region and group of local animation fantasy farm, the community mountain valle Trompia snubs from the outset our plan. Despite this we decide to go ahead. Invited to the table of regional consultation we explain our traditions that we want passionate presservare for future generations. After two years of consultation, our project of social development stops, the mayors of five municipalities there snub, lurk renounced our conciliation tables, decide not to help it continue,our dream stops. Stops also democracy, stop the hopes, the reality of us peasants is sweetened by the usual incompetent politicians and hypocrites, superb. We were deceived, we couldn’t inform the local population, we requested to inform the people but it years obstructed in every way, we asked to take advantage of public goods to inform, there were denied. We had also a political support, but has proved false. What angered me? local rural policytoday public administration I 2012 European authorities snubs, improve our conditions of life, no interest, as if our value does not exist, certain things must not happen.This destructive policy creates the parasite, not protecting the culture, is not conducive to cohesion, and disruptive, and lack of democracy. Waste of EU funds, Why not have inspectors check if it works the EU

funds management policy.

But meanwhile the rural world is abandoned.

This is the wrong policy that we do not accept,We seek the ransom.

Take your pick

My experience was not as bad as Vinay’s, but yes. Several things fell through. For example, here is a post in which I detail the following experience: I roll out an Edgeryders-style project working for the Italian government. Everyone loves it. So they package an iteration 2, which then falls prey to a lot of administrative chaos and passive resistance from the rank-and-file (the top brass were experiencing a hyperdarwinian phase, with a change in government that resulted in getting rid of several people, some very competent, appointed by the previous administration). The project quitely wound down, destroying goodwill and a significant taxpayer-funded value created by my team. It had no enemies that I could spot: everyone seemed genuinely sorry that it got entangled into a horribly complicated high-level procedure.