[p2p-research] Peer Governance of This List

[Michel Bauwens]

Hi Matt,

first of all, thanks for your new page,
http://p2pfoundation.net/Peer_Production_of_Public_Policy

I realize this list is generating some critiques lately ... but I'm
personally overwhelmed by maintaining the different resources, mainly the
blog and the wiki ...

Besides from the that, perhaps I'm still benefitting too much from this list
.... My experience is the following: all email lists are problematic (I have
trouble keeping up with all of them I'm subscribing too), and the only ones
that work better (though they don't interest me much), have paid moderators
such as the Global Solutions system in India (UN development lists). This
one  here, our own p2p research list, generates a lot of response, is
consistently interesting to me, but indeed scares people away through its
volume ...

I'm also weary of adding governance processes when they are not needed 'in
the moment'. For example, I proposed the due process for Marc as a solution
to the particular issue, which then could become 'case precedent' material
in future occasions, but since he did not want to use it, the issue has
become moot, for now

Another more general issue: for about 3 years, almost every thing we've done
around p2p-f ws pretty harmonious and constructive; then about 6 weeks ago,
I got confronted with Stefan's outbursts on Oekonux, then really hostile
reactions on Znet, and now here Marc's issue. Are these coincidences, signs
that things are going wrong, or in the best interpretation, actually a sign
of growth and maturation, a signpost that our influence is growing, but
therefore also generating more opposition? Sometimes I wonder if the issue
is not personal, and that perhaps I'm unaware of a change in myself, as I
have to deal with much more difficult life circumstances, now that I had to
separate from my warm family environment in order to work and feed my
family? I don't think so myself, but who knows?

I'd be happy to receive any feedback on the recent spates in conflicts as
well, beyond thinking about any supplementary governance that would be
needed?

Bear in mind that any supplementary governance needs people to carry it out,

Michel


On 5/24/09, Matt Cooperrider <mattcooperrider at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello P2P List,
>
> I followed the recent netiquette dispute somewhat.  For my part, I have had
> trouble keeping up with the list, mainly because it takes so much extra
> mental effort to draw out the discussions I am interested in from everything
> else.  I thought about some technical solutions to improve the situation,
> but I realized that any such move would need to have buy-in from the group
> to be successful.  That made me think, more generally, that we have a
> commons here that we could be more actively governing to our mutual
> benefit.  At the very least it's an opportunity to theorize together in a
> contained setting that we know intimately.
>
> Anyone want to take a stab at framing the discussion?
>
> Matt
>
> --
> http://mudball.net - get your awesome out
> http://mattcoop.com - about me
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>


-- 
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/20090524/d2c652fb/attachment.html>