[p2p-research] semantic wiki extension

[Alex Rollin]

I've outlined somethings for the board and a committee at:
http://p2pfoundation.net/P2P_Foundation_Board_of_Directors

I've been pretty taken with the idea that there ought be a "membership
program" for the foundation that cultivates folks who want to serve on the
committee and who then might be members of the board.

A

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 9:06 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:

> I'm not following this in detail, and I often disagree with patrick's basic
> premises,
>
> however, I think that developing a set of rights for online users is a
> really very important,
>
> is this something some people could working on, using a wiki project
> document?
>
> once there is a consensus, we would then discuss how to apply it as a
> governance model for the p2p-f ecology?
>
> Michel
>
> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 12:16 AM, Patrick Anderson <agnucius at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Samuel Rose wrote:
>> >
>> > Can you tell me why you are not a member of
>> > http://CommunityWiki.org/en/CommunityWikiAssemblyMemberList<http://communitywiki.org/en/CommunityWikiAssemblyMemberList> were you
>> > denied access to joining that?
>>
>> I did not apply because I did not want to become part of what I
>> consider a wrong direction.
>>
>> I felt isolated and confused because this kind of hierarchy seems
>> wrong to me and yet, since I have no ownership in the server hosting
>> that wiki, I had no real property rights to assert my disdain.
>>
>> But it is even more complicated than that because current "social
>> software" does not take this type of secession into consideration, and
>> so there would be no way of exerting such property rights without
>> becoming fully disconnected from the original community -- and such
>> disconnection would be social suicide since it would then be a stark
>> either/or choice instead of allowing incremental dissent.
>>
>> So there is much work to be done in rethinking and reimplementing how
>> we organize before this problem can be realistically addressed.
>>
>> I outlined my ideas about how to approach some of this complexity at
>> http://CommunityWiki.org/en/PlainTextWiki<http://communitywiki.org/en/PlainTextWiki>:
>>
>>
>> ==Multiuser Concerns
>> * Authors own their own comments outside of the DefinitionArea.
>> * All users may work immediately and all changes are stored, but are
>> actually just votes.
>> * SPAM is quickly voted away (hidden by default for other users) when
>> too many early viewers find it offensive enough to hide or reject.
>> This could be a problem too?
>> * Changes to Definitions or to the HTML/CSS interface appear immediate
>> and permanent to the editor, but are actually just a vote change those
>> things.
>> * The VoteWeight of a user is increased whenever that user makes a
>> change that is accepted by the community.
>> * User implicitly vote for and against others by accepting, hiding or
>> rejecting comments and changes.
>> * SoftSecurity could be used to track VoteWeight.
>>
>> ==Transform lists may also be adjusted by a mixture of community and
>> private NameSpaces.
>>
>> * INPUT files may be edited, but 'Comments' are usually not stored
>> within the INPUT file itself.
>> * Comments are usually metadata that is stored in a DataBase or in
>> companion files.
>> * The CommunityNamespace is used when rendering the INPUT file.
>> * The User's PrivateNamespace is used for his digitally signed Comments.
>> * The CommunityNamespace includes only local hosted PageNames until
>> some Users begin to vote.
>> * Voting occurs when a User makes part of his PrivateNamespace
>> 'available' for the wiki software to read.
>> * The CommunityNamespace is thus 'weighted' by implicit suggestions
>> from Users to do things the way they like it. When enough Users decide
>> the word 'wiki' should link to MeatBall instead of WikiPedia, pages
>> are then rendered with links that point to the new preference.
>> * Maybe the StyleSheet could be a mix of Users preferences? Maybe too
>> crazy. A limited feature subset might work.
>>
>> ==Voting
>>
>> * Any User may work immediately and all changes are stored, and appear
>> to be 'done' to the editor, but are actually just votes for those
>> changes to be made if the community agrees (but what percentage?).
>>
>> * SPAM and SPAMMERS are quickly voted away (hidden by default for
>> other users) when too many early viewers find them offensive enough to
>> hide or reject. This could be a problem too.
>>
>> * The VoteWeight of a user is increased whenever that user makes a
>> change that is accepted by the community.
>>
>> * Users implicitly vote for and against others by accepting, hiding or
>> rejecting comments and changes.
>>
>> * Identity may be optionally 'secured' through password if a User
>> decides to stay a while.
>>
>> * Sub-communities need to be able to "carve out" their own space
>> without annoying others with what the old-timers may consider SPAM.
>> SPAM is subjective pollution?
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> p2presearch mailing list
>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>
> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>
> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>
> Think tank: http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20100804/10848b86/attachment.html>