[p2p-research] On Alex Rollin stated intentions to expel me fromthe P2P Foundation board

[Dafermos, George]

Although I've contributed little, if anything, of value to the wiki,
I've been following the work of the p2pfoundation since its inception
and it pains me to see it consumed in conflicts like the present one. As
there is virtually nothing I could do to resolve this issue in a manner
that seems to be agreeable to both sides, it might have been better for
me to abstain from venting an opinion on the matter. However, as a
couple of things I have written over the years are now part of the wiki,
I feel entitled to express my feelings. 

So, considering that: 
a) the vast majority of content on the wiki has been created by michel
b.;
b) michel has shown himself to be open to views that diverge from his
own, attempting to construct a 'common ground' in which their
differences can be reconciled (through an emphasis on their
commonalities); 
c) michel is the undisputed 'guiding light' behind the community that
has formed around the p2pfoundation as well as the primary *maintainer*
of the p2pfoundation project (to borrow a term favoured by free software
developers), 

I can't see the rationale for excluding michel from the steering of the
p2pfoundation. Nor can I see how his conduct is at variance with the
principles of peer governance: michel's opinion may well carry more
weight than alex's, but that influence should not be confused with
*power* as alex understands it. The reason is simple: michel, regardless
of whether we like him or not, cannot *coerce* anyone into doing
anything they don't like. His authority, in other words, is not
coercive. Far from it, michel's 'authority' is only moral. And moral
authority essentially consists in the trust and respect that a person is
invested with when others recognise the value of his contributions. 

What I'm trying to say here is that the way I see it the present
conflict has very little to do with the 'arbitrariness of those in
authority': that is, with michel abusing the 'power of his office' (as
Alex criticises him to be doing). As I explained above, if michel's
opinion carries more influence than that of others in the project, that
is not because it is tied to some 'office', for there is simply no such
'office' in the p2pfoundation, at least up to now. If michel is
recognised as a figure of (moral) authority, that is not because he
holds some 'office' but because of the recognition of the value of what
he's done so far from community/project members. 

On a more personal note, I would not be willing to support a
p2pfoundation from which michel has been ousted.    

Best,
g.