[p2p-research] further contribution by David Ronfeldt on p2p as successor system

Ryan Lanham rlanham1963 at gmail.com
Fri May 22 20:58:12 CEST 2009 

In other words, you are willing to defecate on the commons until someone
throws you out, because your defecation does not offend you.

Not very P2P as I understand it.

Ryan


On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:53 PM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com> wrote:

> Michel,
>
> It is possible that I never join the community (as in subscribe to its
> norms and rules) but still be in communal relationship to it! Tha's the
> position I've taken.
>
> So when the community decides that they ban such a fiercely independent
> individual then that is the community choice, not mine as I'm happy with an
> unconditional form of communal sharing :)
>
> Marc
>
>
> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Marc,
>>
>> there is never going to be any community without norms, that would be a
>> contradiction in terms
>>
>> and every community you join, except in the very starting phases if you
>> are a co-creator of them, is always already going to have these norms
>>
>> so the questions become, are they modifiable and under what conditions,
>> and is this acceptable to you?
>>
>> if not, you create another one or fork an existing one
>>
>> the good thing is that such exist is always possible, and this freedom of
>> peer production is unique, as other institutions are usually coercive,
>>
>> Michel
>>
>>
>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 10:40 AM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, but, let me challenge you and everyone else in my freely
>>> contributing way:
>>>
>>> What if the individual does not want to join the community but is
>>> otherwise a well meaning, good doing individual...?  What if I see myself
>>> not belonging to this community but just acting in the same virtual space
>>> it's in as well as in other spaces, and making my own rules, changing them,
>>> evolving my own morality and rationality based on my own experiences.
>>>
>>> What if I don't accept the meta? What if I do not subscribe to the common
>>> agreements of this community?
>>>
>>> I am freely contributing but what kind of relationship do I have to the
>>> community? CS would sound right, but it's CS without acceptance of any rules
>>> by the community, i.e. Unconditional CS or UCS since CS tends to involve
>>> conditions/rules (such as the message length that was enforced today despite
>>> that it is inconvenient for me.. and in this case prevents me from
>>> participating because it is an enforced rule that I cannot bypass)
>>>
>>> Is Unconditional CS covered by David's model?
>>>
>>> Marc
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> It is the freely contributing individual which aggregates into peer
>>>> producing communities, I don't think there is a need to repeat this,
>>>> especially in this community which is well aware of the context of our
>>>> debates,
>>>>
>>>> Michel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 9:55 AM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> <<
>>>>> Also, I use the partner state rather than the nexus state, I have to
>>>>> reread what you mean by that. But the partner state is a neutral arbiter
>>>>> between the 3 modes (centralizing governance, decentralized markets,
>>>>> distributed peer production by civil society based communities) and 'enables
>>>>> and empowers the direct production of social value.
>>>>> >>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't see a mention of the individual.
>>>>>
>>>>> The individual in the model above has been replaced with a faceless
>>>>> 'peer' as a new word for cog in the wheel (of a civil society based
>>>>> community)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>   On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 7:18 PM, Michel Bauwens <
>>>>> michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>  Interesting challenge:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> (
>>>>>> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/david-ronfeldts-timn-and-the-four-forms-of-governance/2009/05/20
>>>>>> )
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <a few additional points:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the TIMN forms (not to mention fiske’s forms as well) have existed,
>>>>>> spread throughout life, since ancient times. but they have arisen and
>>>>>> matured at different rates, in different eras (for reasons discussed
>>>>>> elsewhere). and as each form has arisen, a new realm or system of activity
>>>>>> has take shape around it: e.g., the rise of +I leads to development of the
>>>>>> state and associated politics as a major realm, even though hierarchical
>>>>>> institutions show up elsewhere in society too (like business companies).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> these and other dynamics about the rise of earlier forms and their
>>>>>> realms have implications for projecting what +N will do, and i think also
>>>>>> for P2P. most important, its rise must end up defining a new realm, at least
>>>>>> the core of that realm. if it does not do so, it cannot gain its fullest
>>>>>> philosophical and doctrinal import. (maybe that’s the limitation of fiske’s
>>>>>> EM form; it’s about a set of fairness principles and behaviors that are so
>>>>>> widely distributed they cannot define a single realm, unlike his CS or AR.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> thus a challenge for me, and i believe you as well, as we try to look
>>>>>> ahead, is to figure out exactly what philosophical and doctrinal principles
>>>>>> are so embedded in +N, and/or P2P, that a new realm emerges, a realm that is
>>>>>> different from the prevailing ones. another way to ask is, what aren’t
>>>>>> advanced societies getting done using existing forms that they could get
>>>>>> done using a new form>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Michel's reply: That's a very good question David. I do believe that
>>>>>> the combination of the 3 paradigms, open and free, participation, and
>>>>>> commons orientation, are these values, augmented with the additional ones
>>>>>> like non-credentialism, and with equipotentiality  as its metaphysical core
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Your very last question points to the importance of the mode of
>>>>>> production, and my intuition is that it has to do with the handling of
>>>>>> complexity, which hierarchy can handle, and with the survival of the
>>>>>> biosphere, which the market can't handle. For example, the dilemma of
>>>>>> man-hours in software projects (more staff slows down the project), does not
>>>>>> seem to work in the peer production mode, thus has been effectively solved
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <asking that about +N or P2P when their rise is still new right now in
>>>>>> the 21st century is a bit like asking, back in say the 16th or 17th century,
>>>>>> how +M (the rise of markets) would affect societies. who could foretell +M
>>>>>> would not only reshape their economies but also enable the spread of market
>>>>>> principles into politics, resulting in liberal democracies?!>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Michel's reply: yes that is true, but at the same time, patterns have
>>>>>> been emerging and have been  identified, not enough for a full picture, but
>>>>>> enough to give us already some clear ideas about certain aspects.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <even though it’s early and it’s dim, my thinking is that the answer
>>>>>> will take shape around some civil-society activity that will better address
>>>>>> social equity or public-goods matters. a new realm will emerge around that.
>>>>>> at the same time, +N will affect the other realms. it will give rise to what
>>>>>> i call the nexus state as a successor to the nation state, but it will still
>>>>>> have hierarchy at its core. there will also be some new modes of economic
>>>>>> production, but that won’t be the key, since +M markets will endure at the
>>>>>> core>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's where we differ. I believe the core value production will be
>>>>>> outside the market, with the non-capitalist markets (they can't be
>>>>>> capitalist since that destroys the biosphere) a derivative mode for the
>>>>>> production and allocation of scarce goods. But open design is primary to the
>>>>>> production which occurs afterward, and every open design commons will have a
>>>>>> multitude of market players around it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, I use the partner state rather than the nexus state, I have to
>>>>>> reread what you mean by that. But the partner state is a neutral arbiter
>>>>>> between the 3 modes (centralizing governance, decentralized markets,
>>>>>> distributed peer production by civil society based communities) and 'enables
>>>>>> and empowers the direct production of social value.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <if this line of thinking is on track, one possible implication here
>>>>>> is, don’t hang the future of P2P too much on new modes of production. look
>>>>>> for something else as a central emphasis>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> well, I see it as a combination of things, but I think the
>>>>>> hyperproductivity of the mode of production is key as well: better mode of
>>>>>> production, better mode of governance, more inclusive form of property
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I really think we should meet live and trash out some of these issues.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 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/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> p2presearch mailing list
>>>>>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>>>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> Marc Fawzi
>>>>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
>>>>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 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/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Marc Fawzi
>>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
>>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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/
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Marc Fawzi
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090522/496dd69a/attachment.html>

More information about the p2presearch mailing list