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

Sat May 23 07:38:03 CEST 2009

Hi Marc,

Apologies for getting personal here, but I'm asked to intervene so I have to
explain some background.

First an analogy.

In Stargate Atlantis, there is a loudmouth guy, who is a valued member of
the team, competent, but continuously works on the nerves of his mates. (the
scientist/tinkerer) However, given his ultimate goodness and competence,
these outbursts are continually moderated by group dynamics.

The point is: there is no such mechanism in cyberspace. So you are a valued
and competent member, but you have a blunt, if not agressive style of
communication which antangonizes people.

So as Ryan says, we get complaining emails.

Ryan and Kevin have in the past never used the kind of language they used
recently, and the reason is that they have become antagonized.

I must admit I found Ryan's action swift and it surprised me.  However, I
have the full confidence in his good will and intentions.

The easiest solution is what he suggests, that we all learn to use moderate,
non-antagonizing language, and that applies very much to you as well. Say
what you want, but say it with gloves on, because people are sensititive
emotional beings, and it is not necessary to use strong language.

I'm sure in that case Ryan would remove the ban and the discussion can
proceed.

If this is not acceptable, we have indeed to 'invent' a due process, since
we do not really have one.

In that case, we could form a panel say of 3 people, one chosen by you, one
by Ryan, and one chosen by the two chosen ones in agreement (if you still
follow me).

This discussion can go on at p2p-f, then the 3 report back.

My wish is clear. I wish to keep Marc in here, but that he changes his style
of communication (not the content, just the style). Above all I also want to
keep Ryan in here, who has been one of the most active contributors, and has
been invariably civil and constructive on a consistent basis.

If the issue is the famous 100k .. Either Ryan and Kevin adjusts the
settings, or again, we set up a little panel to resolve that particular
issue.

Since this concerns a meta-issue of instituting a arbitration mechanism, I'm
still copying the list, though the issue is personal. But perhaps best is to
move this discussion to p2p-f, so as not to burden the topical threads. This
is a list abot p2p research after all, not for the internal affairs.

Michel

On 5/23/09, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Marc,
>
> Colleagues in good faith asked you to stop various behaviors which you
> persisted with including a tone that was combative and challenging.  That
> led to irritation and complaints.  Whether justified or not, I am not a
> judge.
>
> My perception was your actions and tone were disruptive.  I acted to
> protect the list from that.
>
> I take it as part of my responsibility to assure the commons of the list is
> not disrupted by the continual focus on issues that are not productive to
> the commons.  Someone needs to make that determination.  Regrettably, it
> fell to me as I saw it.
>
> You are welcome to pursue any reasonable recourse.  I am quite happy to
> apologize and to reverse any action if I have wronged you.  Further, I am
> happy to agree Michel as the source of due process on that point.
>
> Michel may have my resignation in this note at his disposal should he wish
> to accept it.  I am easily moved out as an administrator and will take no
> further action or offense.  I will continue to post and participate if I am
> welcome.  I will cease to participate if I am unwelcome by any authority
> including the list administrator.
>
> I enjoy the list, enjoy my colleagues, like you personally, and wish I
> didn't have to deal with this.  But responsibility is part of the P2P ethos
> and I take it as I need to.
>
> My personal recommendation to you is to subordinate your principles to the
> continued productive function of the list by acting with humility and the
> presumption of self-doubt.  That is my own course of action.  However, you
> are an adult and you should do as you think best.  That is what I have also
> done. My interest is continuity of the list and participation by as many
> good minds as is feasible.  If I should become disruptive to that, or if I
> have been disruptive, I am more than happy to subordinate my own interests
> to those of the group by withdrawing, resigning, etc.
>
> Ryan
>
>
> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 4:20 PM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> So because I don't accept the arbitrary message length rule (yet
>> accept the logical one based on Google limit) then you subjectively
>> call that abuse and moderate me out of the list.
>>
>> This wrongness will be exposed. That even in a forum advocating
>> openness and equality that someone would assume authority and moderate
>> out an individual who disagreed with some arbitrary rule regarding
>> message length.
>>
>> I'm sure Michel does NOT stand for this. If he does that would be news to
>> me.
>> I can see thru you.
>>
>> Marc
>>
>>
>> On 5/22/09, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > No one is a stronger advocate of due process than me.  But the process
>> due
>> > is limited the reasonable resources to be expended in a given
>> > administrative
>> > function.  Commons must be administered.  Even public bathrooms are
>> often
>> > policed against vandalism and misuse.
>> >
>> > My action was intended to provide the minimum possible sanction from an
>> > administrative perspective.  It stopped direct access for what seemed a
>> > negative purpose as best as I could interpret it.
>> >
>> > What I believe that proves is that the responsibility and trust
>> associated
>> > with commons will, from time to time, be violated, threatened or ignored
>> > and
>> > that some police function becomes necessary.  It also suggests to me
>> that
>> > various means of appeal and review are necessary in just societies.
>> >
>> > If there is a fairer way to do due process, I'm all for it.  Otherwise,
>> if
>> > I
>> > am asked to administer the list without a governance scheme, I will
>> apply
>> > justice as best I can.
>> >
>> > Ryan
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 3:30 PM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> As a proof of my point about Authority Ranking in the Commons, Ryan
>> went
>> >> ahead and "moderated me out" of the P2P Research list after accusing me
>> >> of
>> >> defecating on the Commons only because I do not like to subscribe to
>> the
>> >> "message length" rule or whatever rule or norm that contradicts the way
>> I
>> >> work.
>> >>
>> >> Now if that is not proof of Authority Ranking at work in the Commons
>> then
>> >> what is?
>> >>
>> >> Marc
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 12:00 PM, marc fawzi <marc.fawzi at gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> No, and that's a very judgmental response Ryan.
>> >>>
>> >>> See my response to David.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 11:58 AM, Ryan Lanham
>> >>> <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> 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
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>>
>> >>> Marc Fawzi
>> >>> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
>> >>> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >> Marc Fawzi
>> >> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/people/Marc-Fawzi/605919256
>> >> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/marcfawzi
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> 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/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090523/f1a90269/attachment-0001.html>