[p2p-research] Kolakowski is dead...

[Ryan Lanham]

Yes, I think I agree though the term "abundance" puts me off because it
sounds inherently silly.  We have abundant outmoded code.  It isn't a boon.
What is a boon is high-access to relevant tools. Relevance is part of the
P2P discussion...soon resilience will be, too.

Abundance isn't a good.  Widely available items that are wanted and needed
is the boon. Maybe that is implied in abundance, but the word itself strikes
me as...self-defeating.

I wonder if the decline of organizational centrality is simply leading to
low-threshold (and I like this concept...you are on to something)
participation simply by absence of the boundaries imposed by the vanguard of
the peers (aka Wikipedia editors!)

What puts me off about communism most isn't the idea of the commune, I
rather can accept that intellectually, what alienates me from the left is
the hypocrisy of the so-called vanguards who expect everyone else to sit in
the back of the bus while they fly first class because of their
"leadership."  Phooey on that.

Ryan



On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 10:03 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:

> One of the key aspets of p2p governance I think, is to engineer 'abundance'
> i.e. free choices, where-ever possible, thereby enabling productive
> participation without necessating intenstive deliberations by any groups ...
> this deliberation itself also becomes mostly technical, itself also open
> mostly to the contributory process ... But never totally, as
> linux/debian/apache have all different arbitrage mechanisms ... I'm not sure
> if this was a learning experience from the often failing, because too high
> treshold, participation processes required in sixties/seventies style
> efforts ... It seems that p2p groups want to avoid this high treshold
> discussions opting for the efficiency that is determined by their
> object-oriented sociality i..e whatever productive cause that made them
> rally in the first place
>
> Michel
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 9:58 PM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 9:53 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>> yes, pluralism both in the economy and governance is necessary to avoid
>>> any kind of totalitarianism, including a p2p one ... Imagine the world rule
>>> by wikipedia admins ..<g>
>>>
>>> Michel
>>>
>>
>> Funny.  That WOULD be a catastrophe...
>>
>> It wasn't but a couple (or a few) years ago that Wikipedia as governance
>> model was extremely popular in graduate school discussions.
>>
>> The future of organizations is low participation, low linkage, high
>> capacity for customization.  P2P helped write that agenda.  Wikipedia was a
>> step toward the low impact governance we're tending toward.
>>
>> Ryan
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
> http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>
> Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
> http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
> http://p2pfoundation.ning.com
>
> Monitor updates 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/20090719/6b8b1e8e/attachment-0001.html>