[p2p-research] p2presearch Digest, Vol 19, Issue 157

[Franz Nahrada]

Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> schreibt:
>Hi Franz,
>
>I removed the oekonux group from the main page, but not deleted, pending
>the plans of Alex Rollin, who I think started it,

OK I think we should soon decide about the fate this one. As much as I try
to think its much better focussing on the existing lists, oekonux and p2p
- lists. There is almost no reason to have an extra discussion group on
oekonux in the NING, I think the very question of the Oekonux Community
and its scope should be discussed on the Oekonux List and Oekonux Project
list.... Alex?

Of course Stefans intervention has clearly shown the problem at stake, and
I think Oekonux 2.0 is far away from being a casual discussion group as it
used to be. I think its OK to say the list process is based on some
assumption and I value the effort of Stefan to make the scope of open
questions to deal with visible. Thats very very valuable for a list
culture! Of course his attacks were  a very very bad way to bring this
intention forward !!  What is needed is a particular set not only of
questions but also of assumptions to be agreed on for participation in the
list discussion, also allowing to outplace discussions which do not fit in
to other places. Which raises overall efficiency. Thats a pattern: "mosaic
of subcultures" - google it!

By the way  talking abou list culture I also fully endorse Marco Fiorettis
invaluable contribution about list culture and netiquette. I think he is
totally right in asking for better style, especially avoiding TAFU  (Text
above, fullquote underneath) and personal conversations without inclusive
content.

Consideriing thematic outplacement, here was a proposal I think by
Andreas, but I would like to reduce it to two fields for the NING:,
possibly two groups. I hope someone comes up and steals this proposal:

"Powers to be"  - a discussion group that analyzes nature and intention of
state and the corporate world, trying to figure out where and how the P2P
phenomenon can thrive and prosper in a partially hostile, partially
supportive environhment. There are case studies of abuse and support of
communities, that need to be digested and evaluated.

"Peer Money" - a discussion group that analyzes community currencies of
all kinds and evaluates and analyzes their implementation.
>
>
>The awards page was created after your call in Manchester, but since you
>since said that you would not push or lead this issue, I think it will be
>stillborn as well. I can remove it from main page as well ... I would not
>delete this one, as at some point, the issue might be re-ignited if
>someone volunteers.

which I hope very much. I  would be supportive and helpful, but currently
am burried in urgent projects
>
>
>I've no idea what the last group is really about, but I think it was
>about hosting in real life?
>
Maybe it came about with the hub discussion, so we need real places where
p2p economies and cultures grow and flourish.


Basically I think we should look for maintainers. And maintainers should
have a central reference point which could be this list. If there is some
report on progress more people will decide to participate in particular
groups.

Why not link this with essays and works to be published?


Franz