[p2p-research] Issue of bullying within private p2p-f communication

[Michel Bauwens]

I want to report on an issue that I had communicated privately, to honour my
own promise to restrain myself, but given Sam Rose's reply which I'm not
copying in without his permission, confirms that private bullying has gone
on much more systematically. I must admit I find it hard to adopt this
restraint, since I feel the very survival of what I have tried to build,
with others, is at state, and people need to know also what happens 'behind
the scenes'. As you will see from the development below, private
communication can be used as a weapon, and it's part of the equation and the
power play

People who have been following this controversy know that it started from
increasing frustration that my concerns were not heard, and replies like
"read the f ..ing manual". A whole attitude of superiority and dismissal of
concern. As you'll see below, I'm literally for Alex "a little man", as well
as an "old man" who has to learn to share. I may be a little and old man
(I'm 52), but I do not think that I need any lessons in sharing.

I also reported on the habit of bullying, but perhaps underestimated how
persuasive this was. While I have seen examples, I was unaware that similar
communication had been directed to other people who expressed support here.

I have also another deeper reason for this. James, who like me has a
conciliatory and mediating personality (in this of course, I have not kept
up that habit), tells me he does not wish to take any specific measures. My
problem is that this means only certainly the following scenario unfolding,
and bear with me for the explanation:

- in the coming weeks, we will collect candidacies for the new board,
present it to this list, and see who else wants on, and decide on a process
for the nomination. Almost certainly, Alex will pose his candidacy, since he
has openly declared that he wants in, and use his position to start a
campaign for my ouster. As I indicated, I feel this is inaceptable at this
stage of the budding life of the P2P Foundation as something more than a
knowledge commons. Permanent 'civil war' will almost certainly dissipate the
positive energies needed to continue construction of the movement. This
means, that were his candidacy accepted, he would have won. It also means
that all the changes that are meant to mold the foundation to his own image,
would succeed. This would mean working under a regime that I would abhor,
the construction of the P2P Foundation as an authorititarian cult. I accept
that Alex has good intentions, but I also strongly believe that there is a
lack of self-reflection and that he is not aware of his bullying manner, and
prisoner to a conviction of righteousness. To use a historical analogy, when
Stalin took over the power structure in Russia, he did not say, I'm an evil
man who wants power and send everyone to the Gulag, but draped himself in
righteousness, billed the others as enemies, used this righteousness as the
standard, and send them to the Gulag. Of course, no such thing could happen
in a voluntary organisation, but I want to indicate a similar process. As
the policy documents produced by Alex indicate, the Board would consist of
ultra-committed advocates, with only one thing in mind, i.e. they would be
righteous, they would swear allegiance to his pledge of commitment, and a
process would be in place to enforce a p2p orthodoxy that would go in the
sense of what has been described. Even if no blood would be shed, the
atmosphere would not be that of a congenial and convicial voluntary
organisation, but that more akin of a cult, driven by a righteous leader.
True all of this is now only visible in seed form, and most of you may not
see this, but it is there already if you can see it.

Needless to say, I do not want to be part of such an organisation, not of
course, because I am against commitment, but because such a vision of p2p-f
sees it not as a movement based on come and go voluntary contrbutions, but
as something altogether different. I have indicated before that Alex'
vision, however legimate as one choice within the p2p sphere, is entirely
monological, since he things he can positively describe singular p2p
principles and hold people accountable to them. My problem is NOT with that
vision, but with the effort to impose that singular vision on the whole of
the p2p-f and to make the work of us that disagree, subservient to that
monological vision. If Alex has a vision of text as code, however legitimate
as a hypothesis and belief, then he simply enacts it, refuses to  take into
account any objections, and implicitely forces all of us to go along. If
Alex has a vision of the P2P-F as an idealized cult of p2p monks, he writes
up policy documents that if accepted, would be the basis to attack those
that diverge from that idealized vision.

In other words, if nothing happens, Alex comes on the Board and I refuse to
enter it under those conditions, this is far from being only a personal
matter only. I will have to create another vehicle for my work, and make
sure that next time, there are minimum protective measures that can counter
any strategy of the coucou, as we have just witnessed. The rest of you,
those that do no wish to act against the imposition of a singular vision,
will ultimately also live with the consequences. I expect that most of you
would leave once they see the real consequences of the change, but others
may come, who like the direction of a stern father figure telling them of
the one way to salvation. In the process though, four years of work will
have been hijacked, and morphed into something that goes against the orginal
spirit.

>From your experience here, through the wiki, blog and mailing list
discussion, you must already be aware of the counter-vision that I have
proposed and enacted, with faults and warts but nevertheless as a sincere
attempt,  that of the foundation as a pluralistic platform, with mutual
respect, and where different visions can co-exist. Such co-existence can
also include that of Alex, if he retracts his promise for a permanent civil
war, and if he would learn to take his place as a peer instead of imposing
his singular vision of everybody else. I have personally lost any confidence
and trust that Alex would be capable of this, but would still accept it in
the name of due process and giving everybody extra chances. But I won't be
happy to work in a context where I have to fight constantly, be bullied. Why
would I, since for me as well this is a voluntary engagement, and the new
lord does not pay me to undergo this particular treatment.

OK then, exhibit one:

"it is a user regime.  it always will be, no matter how confused little men
like you are.  you old people will have to learn to share, especially since
you need the techs in order to do anything.
[8/12/2010 7:15:28 PM]

(Alex does not see the contradiction of advocating a user regime, while
wanting to sit in the board and demote me as a user ... the new regime will
not be a user regime, but a board-driven authoritarian organisation, where
petty rules (the literarlly hundreds of pages are being produced as we
speak) will drive process; what alex has in mind is not just the formal
rules of the wikipedia but also it's power structure of powerful admins,
that have successfully halted the growth of it)


Exhibit two, a for now anonymous confirmation of my intuition:

- You were more than justified. Alex went well into the realm of
personal attacks, harassment and bullying towards you in these
exchanges. I think the only way you were going to see it stop was to
hold up a mirror for him, so that he could see how he was acting.

Yes, this is just a waste of time at this point. I see this as
bullying, because he's putting pressure on you in an abusive way to
try and trip you up, then use this against you.

When someone starts doing stuff like this, there's no need to extend
the regular respect and patience that you might extend to most others.
They don't deserve it.


I really hope that other people will hear this, and take steps to avoid the
metamorphosis of this project.

Michel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100815/af529808/attachment.html>