[p2p-research] shots in the dark/p2p article

[Ryan Lanham]

Paul,

It seems to me that you are generally discussing legitimacy.  Legitimacy is
a big P2P issue...and a big governance issue in general.  It is also an
issue in the philosophy of science.  There are several forms of
legitimacy...some stem from numbers of believers, some stem from logical
strength, some stem from cultures, faith perspectives, etc.

I believe you set up a straw man when you say there is the conventional view
and the alternative.  The alternative has no necessary legitimacy simply
because it differs from the conventional.  For something to be legitimate,
it needs to expand a justification for its legitimacy instead of the
convention.

In crackpot cases such justifications usually revert to conspiracy theories,
theories of bad motivation (e.g. profit motives), etc. in my experience.
That said, sometimes people do act badly to profit and sometimes there are
conspiracies.  The challenge to being a thinking person is to sort out the
messes.

Most people think that for something to be legitimate, it should also be
tranparant and accountable.  That is, facts about it should be discoverable
and poor actions should have consequences.  All these tie back to governance
theory--still the most interesting area of P2P imho.

Ryan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090929/8e2dc03d/attachment.html>