[community] communicating inclusive design en masse

Donna Saccutelli ds03xi at student.ocadu.ca
Thu Jul 7 18:02:51 UTC 2016

This is brilliant. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 7, 2016, at 1:46 PM, Lucian Timofte <luciantimofte at gmail.com> wrote:
> To me, "We all are connected" is an axiom of life, regardless we
> acknowledge this or not. Exclusion comes when people do not acknowledge the
> 'wires' (visible and invisible) which connect one to another. Exclusion in
> design happens because exclusion in real life happens. But even 'inclusion'
> or 'exclusion' are limited concepts. They get meaning through context.
> To me, the proposal #1 ("We all are unique") and #3 ("We all are
> connected") can naturally merge into a single proposal: "We all are unique
> and connected". I would not be afraid of paradoxical wording.
> However, reviewing Jutta's video, I wouldn't be fully honest to salute the
> 'A-ha' moment of it without making few notes.
> I think Inclusive Design with its emphasis on the digital realm is at risk
> of divorcing from the 'solid' world. If this tendency is real, inclusive
> designers must acknowledge two things:
> 1. Perhaps Inclusive Design is a hat too large and it needs to be
> cosmeticised around the digital realm (like Digital Inclusive Design). And
> this is perfectly fine and compliant with the objectives of the Inclusive
> Design as defined by Jutta). If not, the thing number 2 comes into place.
> 2. Inclusive Design as is now, it cuts the branch under its feet. A
> self-sustainable digital environment is utopian though.
> Lastly, as inclusive designer, theologian, thinker, parent (and not only),
> while I applaud the good will, intentions and objectives within the
> Inclusive Design field, I would like to hear more debate around 'media
> ecology' (Jutta mentioned in one of her recent conferences about cobra
> effect created by Inclusive Design).
> Sincerely,
> Lucian
> On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Treviranus, Jutta <jtreviranus at ocadu.ca>
> wrote:
>> Thanks Dana and Jim,
>> When I first came up with the 3 dimensions I wanted the 3rd dimension to
>> reference the need to be cognizant of the systemic impact of design
>> decisions… to realize that no design decision is made in isolation..that we
>> are evermore connected and entangled… that we need to consider the larger
>> and connected context of our designs. The first dimension focuses on the
>> individual, the third dimension focuses on the system and the context. Here
>> is where ripple effects, curbcut phenomena, complexity theory, etc. come in.
>> Also the three dimensions of inclusive design are created in the context
>> of a world changed by digital systems and networks.  In this context we are
>> increasingly entangled. It is very difficult to do anything in isolation,
>> but we can also easily recruit a diverse crowd to assist.
>> The one liners were intended to be headers and then mnemonics for more
>> nuanced and applied descriptions of the dimensions.
>> thanks
>> Jutta
>>> On Jul 6, 2016, at 1:39 PM, Jim Tobias <tobias at inclusive.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks, Dana.
>>> Yeah, I'm not sure how 'we're all connected' is central to the message.
>> It's obviously true, but may be hard for some to relate to, and thus create
>> some skeptical distance? (I'll confess that's my reaction at times.)
>>> Instead, we could tie into 'needing everyone's unique contribution' by
>> saying how important it is that we be *able* to connect with
>> anyone/everyone. That is, the positive externality of the 'network' being
>> more valuable to each of us, the more people we can communicate with
>> through it. That would reinforce the importance of auto-personalization,
>> because you won't know in advance who you want to connect with, or what
>> their favorite mode or method will be.
>>> I would love to see this as a visualization that shows technology
>> changing over time, and individuals also changing over time, and attempting
>> to massively reach out to each other through the flux. Imagine 2 nearby
>> merry-go-rounds; each rider is the brass ring for another rider. Then pull
>> back and see more merry-go-rounds in other dimensions; some riders are
>> people, some are digital thingies. Connections and accomplishments flash
>> around and expand the scope.
>>> Buffy Sainte-Marie background music track!
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3uY3-O09sQ
>>> ***
>>> Jim Tobias
>>> Inclusive Technologies
>>> +1.908.907.2387 v/t
>>> skype jimtobias
>>> @inclutech
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: community [mailto:community-bounces at lists.idrc.ocadu.ca] On
>> Behalf Of Ayotte, Dana
>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2016 1:07 PM
>>> To: Treviranus, Jutta <jtreviranus at ocadu.ca>
>>> Cc: Inclusive Design Community <community at lists.idrc.ocadu.ca>
>>> Subject: Re: [community] communicating inclusive design en masse
>>> Hi Jutta,
>>> Regarding the 3 dimensions characterization, I think the first two are
>> clear. The third “we are all connected” has got me thinking - this idea
>> doesn’t seem to be clearly captured in how we’ve described the third
>> dimension of “Broader Beneficial Impact<
>> http://idrc.ocadu.ca/about-the-idrc/49-resources/online-resources/articles-and-papers/443-whatisinclusivedesign>”.
>> Currently it stresses broader impact/interconnectedness of people and
>> systems/virtuous cycles of inclusion. I think these ideas can be
>> extrapolated to encompass “we are all connected”, but I don’t think it’s
>> obvious from our definition. It seems that either we need to rethink or add
>> to the definition we currently have (this makes most sense to me - and
>> makes me think of the cause and effect exercise), or come up with a
>> different one-line characterization (which I’m having trouble doing!).
>>> Regarding the video, I agree with some others - I love the simplicity of
>> it. Perhaps it could be a bit shorter/more concise.
>>> Dana
>>> Dana Ayotte
>>> Inclusive Designer
>>> Inclusive Design Research Centre
>>> OCAD University
>>> www.idrc.ocad.ca<http://www.idrc.ocad.ca/>
>>> www.ocadu.ca<http://www.ocadu.ca/>
>>>> On Jul 5, 2016, at 11:43 AM, Treviranus, Jutta <jtreviranus at ocadu.ca
>>> <mailto:jtreviranus at ocadu.ca>> wrote:
>>> I’ve been trying to distill our inclusive design theory into simple to
>> understand and quickly communicated chunks for the large scale workshops
>> (4000+ participants) planned by some of our partners.
>>> What do people think of characterizing the 3 dimensions as:
>>> 1. We are all unique
>>> 2. We need everyone’s unique contribution 3. We are all connected
>>> Also, would anyone be willing to create a more professional version of
>> this piece I threw together many years ago:
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VxQEPw1x9E
>>> thanks
>>> Jutta
>>> ________________________________________
>>> Inclusive Design Community (community at lists.idrc.ocadu.ca) To manage
>> your subscription, please visit:
>> http://lists.idrc.ocadu.ca/mailman/listinfo/community
>>> ________________________________________
>>> Inclusive Design Community (community at lists.idrc.ocadu.ca) To manage
>> your subscription, please visit:
>> http://lists.idrc.ocadu.ca/mailman/listinfo/community
>> ________________________________________
>> Inclusive Design Community (community at lists.idrc.ocadu.ca)
>> To manage your subscription, please visit:
>> http://lists.idrc.ocadu.ca/mailman/listinfo/community
> ________________________________________
> Inclusive Design Community (community at lists.idrc.ocadu.ca)
> To manage your subscription, please visit: http://lists.idrc.ocadu.ca/mailman/listinfo/community

More information about the community mailing list