thoughts to follow up on...

[APOLOGIES for this mess, but better out than in. I hope.]

things getting in the way of making Milla's birthday cake... clarify/organise this mess on monday...

* do I have this right? Web 2.0 is about making a better, more accessible/interactive web (technology based, by nature) ... but L2 is just about making better, more accessible/interactive libraries (which include technology, but that's not all) ?
* L2 is about introducing change ... questioning why, removing the boundaries, doing what they want/providing what they need - sidestepping "broccoli libnship" - give 'em what we reckon they need.
* is this what Fiona Emberton & uni's "making it happen" project is all about (why not have food in the library? what is the point of all those unread signs) ?
* hmm- "Integrating change" .... potential to co-market L2/EBLIP - both to do with introducing change/new way of working (although possibly one trying to be 'outrageous' (or at least unrestrained?) ... the other could be seen as constrained by rules/tools/structures. Need to be L2 when introducing EBLIP... look behind the framework, don't be constrained by it - use it as a support instead.
EBLIP - just because you've always done it a certain way, doesn't mean that's the way it has to be (be innovative, just be aware). Make decisions based upon best available evidence ... just because the evidence for something doesn't necessarily exist yet, doesn't mean you can't ... just proceed knowing that's where you're coming from (and then report your experience to start building the evidence). Justify by acknowledging the setting is an untested, innovative concept?

- technology or not discussion
- Ingrid has ordered this ... but check out the sample in meantime
- lib2 not just about service delivery ... a role for mngt/evaluation too
- library crunch swicki

* Discovery of the day - basecamp project mngt & related services - whiteboard etc. Writeboard might be a good spot to dump garbage like this.