[p2p-research] member managed web service

[Matt Cooperrider]

Hi Patrick,

I think I follow your argument.  What about when we are dealing with a
commons (as many wikis can be understood)?  There is no owner, and no sale
of goods, as far as I can see.  How would you interpret that situation
within your theory?

Best,
Matt

On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Patrick Anderson <agnucius at gmail.com> wrote:

> > Patrick Anderson wrote:
> >> Are you interested in considering an online community in which the
> >> members are the actual and only owners (...)?
>
> Matt Cooperrider wrote:
> > I think that is exactly what I'm looking for: a community in which
> everyone
> > who is a member has some voice input into the evolution of the site
> itself.
>
>
> Matt,
>
> Since communities are dynamic* across time, insuring members remain
> the "actual and only owners" of the Material Means of Production needs
> a non-static solution.
>
> This temporal complexity requires we consider factors that are
> traditionally outside the scope of limitations for simple property
> ownership.  While regular property ownership can be a stepping-stone
> toward such an organization, there is also a 'bad' side to ownership
> that we must guard against lest we arrive in the typical centralized
> configuration...
>
>
> I have identified the primary factor in need of adjustment, and credit
> most of that 'generalizing' the concepts of User Freedom as outlined
> by Richard Stallman, and specifically the requirement that Object
> Users (Product Consumers) gain "at cost" access to the Sources
> (Material Means) of that product even when they do NOT know how to
> 'operate' those Sources.
>
> Observe that 'Profit' (literally "Consumer Price" - "Owner Costs")
> arises only when the Consumer does not yet have enough Ownership.  For
> example: when you own an apple tree, you might pay workers to tend it,
> but those wages are but a cost that any Owner must pay.  But every
> Owner is able to 'escape' the payment of profit - for who would they
> pay it to?
>
> So, when a current Owner/Member sells something to someone else that
> has insufficient ownership, that Owner has the 'opportunity' to charge
> a price above cost (to profit).  [[remember, Wages are not Profit,
> Wages are a Cost of production]].
>
> But if such a community allows Profit to be treated as a 'reward' for
> that current owner (as Capitalism does), then that current owner will
> aquire even *more* property as he invests that profit into more
> Material Means of Production, while the Consumer who made that
> overpayment will be left with nothing but the product he overpaid for.
>
> Profit can be thought of as a "plea for growth" from the Consumer who
> paid it.  It is the Consumer's dependence upon the current Owners.
>
> He is saying "look, I'll pay you more than it really cost (costs
> include wages) to make this beer because I don't own the equipment,
> and am not organized enough to hire those with the skills - otherwise
> I could get it "at cost"".
>
> I'm not saying we shouldn't charge Profit (for to do so would stop
> growth altogether), but only that profit should be understood as a
> measure of consumer dependence that needs to be 'balanced' if we are
> to remain "Member Managed" - for otherwise only the originators will
> Own (and therefore manage), while the latecomers will be a dependent
> group that can only beg for recognition.
>
> In conclusion: While real property ownership appears to be a direct
> solution to "Member Managed" problem, it is incomplete unless "price
> above cost" (profit) is treated as an investment from the Consumer who
> paid it.
>
>
> ----
> (*) Some of the dynamism we must consider:
> 1.) The total number of members grows and shrinks as members join or leave.
>
> 2.) Members desire different *types* of "goods and services" which may
> require the purchase of different (more) Material Means of Production.
>
> 3.) Members desire different quantities of "goods and services" which
> requires their ownership rise and fall to match their consumption.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090204/d057acb7/attachment.html>