[p2p-research] peer governance and democracy, request to Ned: Digital Media Literacies

Mon Feb 4 07:05:33 CET 2008

Sam,

I just want to note and re-inforce what you are saying. Having a general
literacy is one thing, requiring a specialized literacy is another.

I want to be able to drive my car, but I refuse to be an expert in the
technoligical processes that make it drive.

I want to know just enough of social software tools to get my message
across, not more, because my priority will always be towards reading and
learning more, not towards technical proficiency.

This is the result of the specialization in our societies, and the case for
the overwhelming majority of world citizens, who only wish to learn maximum
five percent of what a given tool offers, sufficient, 'good enough', for
their needs, and this is what good designers should strive for.

This is why Linux is largely confined to infrastructure used by technical
users, not on the desktop, though maybe ubuntu will change that ...

I may be wrong on this, but last I heard, it still took 2 hours to install
Ubuntu or a Linux desktop system ... still not for me,

Michel

On Feb 3, 2008 9:26 PM, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey, y'all, I still need to read Ned's book...
>
> On Feb 2, 2008 11:35 PM, Ned Rossiter <ned at nedrossiter.org> wrote:
>
> > hi Michel, thanks for this.
> >
> > As I note in my response to Daren's review, another challenge for
> > network governance is scale. And for massive projects/platforms like
> > wikipedia et al (and, let's face it, much of what the net tends to
> > do), there are always going to be those dysfunctional dimensions that
> > you refer to vis-a-vis platform owners vs. users.  I don't think
> > those tensions can ever be 'solved'.  But users can harass owners.
> > This worked to an extent with ICANN, facebook, etc.  What the history
> > of the net has shown again and again is that when enough users get
> > fed up they move on.  And that's where of course developers/
> > programmers are so important.
>
>
> A related note: One of the interesting developments of the digital medium
> is that as social, information, and knowledge software evolves, it is
> increasingly shifting more and more of the power over functionality,
> location of and access to data, control over interface function and design,
> and info architecture elements over to the end user, or to
> non-programming-literate users.
>
> Although, by the same token, people who do not have a basic literacy in
> programming principles still often do not understand how to use and access
> these tools, even when they are available. Basic participatory media
> literacies could arguably change observed outcomes. I cannot count how many
> times I have helped people unlock functionality they did not know about in
> many existing social software platforms, such as WordPress, Drupal, Media
> Wiki, etc.
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > So what happens when people with an interest in governance don't have
> > the skills/time/interest to be programmers? Well, I guess that's
> > where they/we either develop basic skills and/or engage in the type
> > of lobbying with owners. In the case of the latter, a
> > representational structure creeps in and consequently structures the
> > mode of communication. And as you note, frustrations very quickly
> > arise.  It's no wonder that the net is so often presupposed as
> > inherently 'democratic' because of the way so many communicative
> > relations online reproduce the structural dynamics of 'democracy'.
> > But most thinking of net democracy still assumes a form of democracy
> > that reproduces the tropes of liberal democracy and the state form
> > (e.g. the residue of the citizen-subject is carried over to the net,
> > which I think is a big mistake).
> >
> > The very existence of owners/sysops indicates the non-participatory
> > (or at least closed circle) dimension of networks. There is
> > frequently very little communication/participation between admins and
> > users.  And most are fine with this relation. Who wants to clear our
> > spam every day on a mailing list for example, or attend to the
> > numerous admin requests to process postings from non-subscribers
> > (which this list still has a strangely high amount of)?
> >
> > The other obvious thing to note is that the culture of governance
> > varies considerably across widely adopted applications. Geert Lovink
> > documents this well in his analysis of mailing list cultures. This
> > points to the fact that a universal model of network governance will
> > never exist.
> >
> > Personally, I'd be interested to read about how free labour in mmog's
> > might be thought of in terms of governance, and how such relations
> > and modes of production might hold the potential for political
> > organization.  And I'm interested in anthropologies on the governance
> > of small-scale projects - partly because such work can enable an
> > immanent relation and thus analysis of the practice of building
> > networks & concepts (i.e. network governance, in other words).
> >
> > Another reason analyses of network governance are important is
> > because they reveal the limits or borders of networks. The conflicts
> > that arise within and across networks helps us understand the 'the
> > political' of networks and their geocultural dimensions.
> >
> > best
> > Ned
> >
> > On 2 Feb 2008, at 21:40, Michel Bauwens wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Ned,
> > >
> > > I saw a review of your book and particularly this quote, see below.
> > >
> > > As you perhaps know, I have recently paid attention to problems of
> > > peer governance, which is I think very similar to your concept of
> > > the governance of organized networks, and I feel I can subscribe to
> > > what you say there. I have been mentioning the issues with
> > > wikipedia, digg, and soon, the amazon reviewing process.
> > >
> > > They all share the problems that the participatory processes have
> > > serious dysfunctions, and that the platform owners lack a certain
> > > legitimacy to tackle them, hence a natural inclination to perhaps
> > > think that formal democratic procedures may be of use, as already
> > > applied with success in the apache community etc...
> > >
> > > I would love to have your opinion on this, and then to publish it
> > > in our blog as well.
> > >
> > > reference to review http://rccs.usfca.edu/bookinfo.asp?
> > > ReviewID=535&BookID=388
> > >
> > > quote:
> > >
> > > In Part I, Rossiter investigates the challenge for democracy in
> > > organized networks. Representative democracy is generally assumed
> > > to be a failed institution in this book, but its emphasis on
> > > vertical, hierarchical structuring, even with a careful
> > > consideration of multi-stakeholderism, is considered to be
> > > especially ineffective for the horizontal, distributive capacities
> > > of networks. As Rossiter puts it frankly: "It is time to abandon
> > > the illusion that the myths of representational democracy might
> > > somehow be transferred and realized within networked settings. That
> > > is not going to happen" (95). In the call to rethink
> > > representational democracy, the author hopes that organized
> > > networks, which include perhaps virtual and informal social
> > > movement organizations, will "make a strategic turn and begin to
> > > scale up their operations in ways that would situate them within
> > > the formal/centralized [organizational] quadrant, but in such a
> > > manner that retains their informal, distributed and tactical
> > > capacities" (75). Refreshing in this book is the argument that the
> > > so-called open character of organized networks ought to attempt to
> > > match up with power-wielding networked organizations to achieve
> > > anything. In this sense, Rossiter is a realist, pragmatic in his
> > > hope for intervention and change for a better world. This, I
> > > believe, is Organized Networks' unique contribution to theory: a
> > > middle way can be had between radically decentered movements on the
> > > Web and centralized organizational regimes which hold all the power
> > > in our world. To achieve this meta-collaboration -- or meta-
> > > confrontation, depending on how one looks at it -- the focus must
> > > be on formation rather than form, on "relational processes not
> > > representational procedures" (13).
> > >
> > > --
> > > The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer
> > > alternatives.
> > >
> > > Wiki and Encyclopedia, at http://p2pfoundation.net; Blog, at http://
> > > blog.p2pfoundation.net; Newsletter, at http://integralvisioning.org/
> > > index.php?topic=p2p
> > >
> > > Basic essay at http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499;
> > > interview at http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-
> > > world-to-come.html
> > > BEST VIDEO ON P2P: http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?
> > > docid=4549818267592301968&hl=en-AU
> > >
> > > KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at http://del.icio.us/
> > > mbauwens
> > >
> > > The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN, http://
> > > www.shiftn.com/
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > p2presearch mailing list
> > p2presearch at listcultures.org
> > http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Sam Rose
> Social Synergy
> Tel:+1(517) 639-1552
> Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451
> AIM: Str9960
> Linkedin Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/samrose
> skype: samuelrose
> email: samuel.rose at gmail.com
> http://socialsynergyweb.com/services
> http://blog.socialsynergyweb.com
>
> Related Sites/Blogs/Projects:
> OpenBusinessModels: http://socialsynergyweb.net/cgi-bin/wiki/FrontPage
> http://p2pfoundation.net
> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
> http://www.cooperationcommons.com
> http://barcampbank.org
> http://bfwatch.barcampbank.org
> http://communitywiki.org
> http://extinctionlevelevent.com
>
> Information Filtering:
> http://ma.gnolia.com/people/srose/bookmarks
> http://del.icio.us/srose
> http://twitter.com/SamRose

-- 
The P2P Foundation researches, documents and promotes peer to peer
alternatives.

Wiki and Encyclopedia, at http://p2pfoundation.net; Blog, at
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net; Newsletter, at
http://integralvisioning.org/index.php?topic=p2p

Basic essay at http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499; interview at
http://poynder.blogspot.com/2006/09/p2p-very-core-of-world-to-come.html
BEST VIDEO ON P2P:
http://video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=4549818267592301968&hl=en-AU

KEEP UP TO DATE through our Delicious tags at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens

The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
http://www.shiftn.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20080204/e8ee4960/attachment-0001.html 