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

Tue Feb 5 01:38:29 CET 2008

Hi Sam,

I of course agree with your general call for more literary. In fact, in many
ways of course my own intensive use of certain tools has created a literary
about many aspects of knowledge processes, but, at the same time, I realize
that even my limited understandings are not match by about 99% of the people
I deal with. When I was teaching, searching for certain things over the
internet, which took me a few seconds, was an impossible task for nearly all
students in the class after a full hour ... they just didn't have the skill
(which means I have a less sanguine opinion of the digital natives, sure
they can twitter ... but that doesn't mean they have other knowledge
skills). So of course, I would wish and support for more literacy, while at
the same time being wary of those that make it a requirement, and propose
technological tools that are beyond the capabilities of the vast majority,
or assume that the whole population should be turned into hackers and
programmers. It is not going to happen, and free software advocates should
work on tools that can really compete with commercial software, who has much
more attention to the 'last mile of usage', compared to those that are
scratching their own itch,

Michel

On Feb 5, 2008 3:29 AM, Samuel Rose <samuel.rose at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, I definitely respect your perspective, for sure. Although, it is so
> totally the opposite of my own nature, which refuses *not* to understand the
> technological processes. :) But, I think this is a matter of personal
> "taste" in problem solving.
>
> You probably have more room on your "mental table" for things that I may
> be crowding out with my quests to understand technology. Yet, if my car
> breaks down in the middle of nowhere, I can often do something about it :)
>
> Anyway, I think that what I hope will happen is that people will obtain a
> general literacy of the underlying principles and nature of the medium. Not
> so much the fine grained technological details, but the basic pervasive
> properties. Enough so that you would be empowered to be self sufficient
> using tools of your choice because you understand what they do on a general
> level.
>
> In your case, I would venture to guess, based on discussions that we have
> had over time, that by using the medium, and solving problems, you have
> gained some of these literacies. This is one of the most effective ways for
> people to gain these basic understandings, by using  tools, and employing
> processes to solve problems they actually care about.
>
> People still don't necessarily become technological experts, but they
> understand the utility of something like wiki, for instance, by using it in
> practical applications. Then, this becomes part of their social media
> toolkit for solving problems. And, I think some of the basic programming
> principles become available to more people as they are shifting into the
> user interface. Things like Yahoo Pipes, which mimics the "pipes" of Unix
> systems in certain ways. And, understanding data as objects, and hooking
> data objects together, such as when you tag web pages in del.icio.us. Or,
> when data is exportable and reusable as RSS feeds
>
> And, on a deeper level, people start to learn about the more abstract
> systemic concepts, and they can learn to understand possible outcomes of
> certain approaches. I think the overall roughly 5% of knowledge about how
> something works you describe is increasing a bit, just because of the nature
> of the digital medium, which gives so many dimensions of possibilities to
> the user.
>
> I am basically theorizing that once "power" of certain types in media
> ecologies is shifting from "administrators" to  "users", that  the system
> would only sustain itself if the "users" understand the abstract dynamics of
> what they are doing on different scales beyond themselves.
>
> For instance, if they are collectively managing a resource as a "commons",
> it probably only be a sustainable commons if most of the people involved
> recognize the dynamics, and understand the "game" they are playing (tragedy
> of the commons), and act accordingly. This is the type of "literacy" that is
> lacking, and is needed IMO. Also, literacies of human nature, and literacies
> of foresight, and media ecology, among others.
>
> For instance, a media ecology example is that many people from a
> generation previous to mine will approach the digital medium from the old
> print and broadcast paradigms, and will tend to want to use the medium as a
> one-way content delivery medium. They are struggling to understand the how's
> and why's of multi-way communication and content creation. In part, because
> for so long, controlling the message, and controlling flows of information,
> and access to knowledge was the best route to succeeding commercially, which
> was the only success that mattered to most people. Now, it is my belief that
> a significant amount of people are starting to intuit that there are other
> benchmarks for success beyond money. So, I think they can understand how
> their actions and reactions, and ways of solving their problems of existence
> can contribute towards those other benchmarks or motivations.
>
> I think that the majority of people can come to gain these literacies, and
> I think that the path towards this happening lies in part within
> http://www.communitywiki.org/en/VisualLanguage  and
> http://www.communitywiki.org/en/PlainTalk in helping people understand how
> to make use of new mediums
>
> (Also, I can confirm that it takes equally as long to install Windows XP
> as it does to install most Linux Distributions. Neither of which should take
> an hour on a computer who's vintage is within the last 4-5 years) And, I
> recently installed Debian [which is what Ubuntu is based off of]on a
> computer in about 20 minutes. Although, I did not install a lot of things I
> didn't need either. Instead I install as I need. For an even quicker Ubuntu
> install, that takes way less space on your computer try
> http://www.xubuntu.org/  :-) )
>
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 4, 2008 1:05 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 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/
> >
>
>
>
> --
> 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/20080205/3b29cf44/attachment-0001.html 