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

Sun Aug 15 18:59:31 CEST 2010

Sorry, I've been off a bit.  It is probably appropriate for someone else to
pick up my list support duties as my personally life keeps me too busy to do
much.

I have liked Alex and I don't see this as parallel to Nathan or the other
fellow whose name I forget.

Alex is not loony.  He is angry.  What is coming through here is a
frustration, to my mind, with the idea of Michel's guidance of the
foundation as its founder and, effectively, it's proxy owner or surrogate.
I don't think that frustration is merited.  I think a point was being
made...but that lives were at stake in the discussion.  Namely, Michel has a
personal stake in his role in what the Foundation is and what it becomes,
and anyone who doesn't understand that has never started anything.

That said, organizations have the right to govern themselves how they see
fit within the law.  In fact, I think that's what Alex has been saying as
I've read it.  But organizations don't follow ideals and are imperfect.
That much I know.

I have long admired Michel as I do still, and he is a man of ideals while
yet, as anyone, imperfect.

Sadly, language has been used here on both sides that burned bridges.  In
business, I've long learned to avoid such language.  No good comes of it.
Ever.  It merely raises stakes until someone must crack and walk.  If that's
the intent, it is a form of "chicken" as in racing two cars toward each
other until someone flinches.

I recommend, you both try to write something conciliatory...and if that is
impossible to find a path of mutually beneficial advancement, I recommend
Alex move on.  He is a smart guy and has a thousand futures.  I also
recommend that the governance processes of the Foundation become more
formal...whatever the ideal in play.  Organizations always have crises, and
this one will be no different.  Mechanisms to face them will always be
necessary.

Ryan

On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 4:53 PM, Alex Rollin <alex.rollin at gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't know what came over me but I can see it was a mistake to get in a
> fight here.  I apologize for my part in it.
>
> Alex
>
> On Aug 15, 2010, at 3:00 PM, Michel Bauwens < <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
> michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Alex,
>
> this is a voluntary organisation around a shared goal and both the peer
> governance of the community and the democracy of the formal foundation have
> certainly their place; at the same time, autocracy has no place, and
> everybody has a right to build influence and trust through proven
> contributions. This is what I have tried to do myself, and as we can see
> from the last few weeks, I have no independent power to stop you, and have
> not taken any administrive measures to stop you, because I can't (first I
> didn't want though now I think we do need some protections against hostile
> takeovers)
>
> you certainly have the right to communicate and to share your vision with
> others
>
> it is also a special project of which I'm the founder, and we're at a
> delicate stage of moving towards a more collective project,
>
> there are two visions at stake, as I see it,
>
> a pluralist vision where multiple views are possible honouring each other
> through mutuality, and where code is subordinated to the creation of
> knowledge; and where procedures are secondary to prior effort at consensus
> and conflit resolution through dialogue and accepted community arbitrage
>
> and the way I see it, a vision which claims to know what p2p is, wants to
> create tools to enact it in practice, and a very activist board that aims to
> steer this effort and does not leave room for other views, which it seeks to
> displace and dominate; certainly that is the way I see my experience in the
> last few weeks and months
>
> indeed, in your practice, in the past few months, I see the following, you
> enacted code and were insensitive to any challenges to your vision of it,
> you created policy documents given the impression of officialdom without
> acknowledging their private proposal status, and you have a habit of
> bullying  and insulting the people who disagree with you, in the private
> emails that accommpany the public debate .. you fight to win and dominate
> and behaved like an autocrat
>
> none of the problems would have arisen if you had been more modest about
> your actions, acknowledged differences graciously, and acknowledged me as a
> peer with some influence because of the prior work I have done here. I have
> four years of practice to prove that I have never imposed my views
>
> instead, you sought dominance and power, create code and policy which aims
> to dislodge plurality, and openly declare that you are in the game to oust
> me
>
> in theory, yes, this is legitimate, but given the strategy of the coucou
> you have been following, I cannot accept, not the challenge, but the fact
> that it would consume a large amount of destructive energies, and that there
> is someone on board who does not respect the plural vision, the mutuality
> required by cooperation
>
> I'm assuming that seeking dominance for you is second nature, and I am not
> sure that you are even aware that you do it, neverthless, imposing and
> dominating is what you attempt to do, and you use process and democracy to
> hide behind it
>
> Since you cannot accept the slightest challenge to your all-knowing
> certainty about the direction of the p2p foundation, and in my view see it
> as a direct attack on the ego, what your call for democracy in reality
> means  is a promise for endless scheming and opposing my ideas and vision ..
>
> It is not that they cannot be challenged, but there must be a certain
> amount of acceptance of the road ahead as well, in order to have some form
> of commonality amongst our diversity,
>
> so, peer governance will evolve, and you've seen it in action, we talk
> amongst ourselves about the best way forward and how to deal with the
> conflict, no one has been barking orders and it has been through the
> presentation of the evidence of your actions in the past few weeks
>
> and we will also have a new board, discuss about the process to nominate
> its members, and install democratic procedures
>
> but, I cannot accept someone who vows to destroy my work, has indeed made
> it very hard in the last few weeks to progress on, and vows to continue
> until he wins,
>
> you're win-loose propositions and mentality are in my view not the proper
> way to engage with the P2P Foundation, and I reserve the right to make this
> known, and to oppose it.
>
> here's a contribution below that expresses better than myself, what I think
> happened, and why you are so fond of democracy and procedure, and are
> writing an endless stream of policy pages.
>
> Again, I'm  normally opposed to psychologizing differences, since they can
> be used to prove superiority, yet since it is my conviction that it is
> central for what happened between us, I will share it, and to explain my
> opposition to your use of democracy as  means to dominate and take over the
> P2P Foundation. Not that I believe you will succeed, but because I believe
> you will create further damage in the process, and I'm loathe to resume
> productive work, without being drained by an endless conflict.
>
> This is why I'm asking you to retract your democratic threat to do all in
> your power to take over this community and to fight me until I'm reduced to
> total powerlessness as a user. I already have been in the position of user
> vis a vis your imposed new rules and information architecture, I know how
> much you have respected my rights to disagree, and I can no longer accept
> this, and don't want such a regime to dominate all the good work we have
> done so far.
>
> I have my own flaws, you have your opinion on it which you generously
> shared and  I'm sure others can say more, but, I'm pretty sure that there is
> no inkling of a desire for autocracy
>
> so, here is the anonymous quote, that sets behaviour into context:
>
> (send privately)
>
> Alex, believe me, you'd be so much happier if you stopped trying to be the
> boss and to push other people down, you have great skills and abilities, you
> would naturally rise through your contributions, and were, if you had not
> sought and thought that you needed to push others away in order to achieve
> your goals ... there was place for everybody here
>
> Michel
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 7:21 PM, Alex Rollin < <alex.rollin at gmail.com><alex.rollin at gmail.com>
> alex.rollin at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Michel, the energy behind your threat is associated with my stated
>> intentions to expel you from the board.  I said in private that I want to
>> vote you off the board.  I don't see a problem with this intention.  This is
>> how democracy works.
>>
>> To me, this is about democracy, and this is good.  Voting for and against
>> a position or for a representative is a good thing.
>>
>> Maybe this is the subject we should talk about?
>>
>> If this was a democracy I would vote you off.
>>
>> I say I have a right to critique your use of authority and the decisions
>> you make.
>>
>> I want users to have rights.  I want users to be represented on the board.
>>
>> I see democracy as an important part of a community.
>>
>> I have a right to contact others. I have a right to learn from their
>> concerns and to share information with them.
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>   On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 7:43 AM, Michel Bauwens <<michelsub2004 at gmail.com><michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
>> michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>   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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> p2presearch mailing list
>>> <p2presearch at listcultures.org> <p2presearch at listcultures.org>
>>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>>  <http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org><http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org>
>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> p2presearch mailing list
>> <p2presearch at listcultures.org> <p2presearch at listcultures.org>
>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>  <http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org><http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org>
>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> P2P Foundation: <http://p2pfoundation.net> <http://p2pfoundation.net>
> http://p2pfoundation.net  - <http://blog.p2pfoundation.net><http://blog.p2pfoundation.net>
> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>
> Connect: <http://p2pfoundation.ning.com> <http://p2pfoundation.ning.com>
> http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
> <http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org><http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org>
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
> Updates: <http://del.icio.us/mbauwens> <http://del.icio.us/mbauwens>
> http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; <http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens><http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens>
> http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; <http://twitter.com/mbauwens><http://twitter.com/mbauwens>
> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; <http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens><http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens>
> http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>
> Think tank: <http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI><http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI>
> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> <p2presearch at listcultures.org>p2presearch at listcultures.org
>  <http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org>
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>

-- 
Ryan Lanham
rlanham1963 at gmail.com
Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
P.O. Box 633
Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
Cayman Islands
(345) 916-1712
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100815/42510ed6/attachment.html>