[p2p-research] commentary to nicholas carr piece

Fri Dec 3 09:53:45 CET 2010

ok, neal, sounds like a sensible thing to do,

why don't you start with your own top five, and  I'll add mine,

please note that we have a list of partners at the bottom of
p2pfoundation.net as well an extensive blogroll already, but they do not
necessarily follow your criteria set,

Michel

On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 11:25 PM, Neal Gorenflo <neal at shareable.net> wrote:

> Hi Michel,
>
> First, I should say that I feel very well supported by this community
> already.  I'm grateful for having colleagues like you, and the chance to
> collaborate.  Thank you!  I guess I'd like more of an already good thing ;)
>
> Here's draft ideas on how the sharing and commons online media community
> could do more together:
>
> -Make a list of the core sharing and commons people and groups that keep
> active blogs.  By core I mean those people we already know.  We could keep
> this list on the P2P wiki (maybe something like it is already there!).
>
> -Bring this group together virtually somehow, maybe on a listserv
>
> -As a start, do a link exchange among group members (on blogrolls, for
> instance).
>
> -Then stay in regular contact, and collaborate in an ad hoc way on story
> ideas, content distribution, promotion, finding writers, design talent,
> programmers, etc.
>
> This being said, I'm not attached to any particular method of organizing.
>  My interest is in finding more ways to work together to increase our
> influence.
>
> James, I'd be happy to discuss the above or other ways to work together.
>  I'm available tomorrow and Monday, then the following week for a Skype
> (Pacific Time).
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Neal
>
> --
>
> Neal Gorenflo | Publisher, http://Shareable.net | 415.867.0429
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Dear Neal,
> > As you perhaps know, I occasionally, if not regularly, promote shareable
> > items through facebook/twitter and sometimes the blog
> > (http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/?s=shareable), and your material is also
> > prominently featured in our wiki section at
> > http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Sharing,
> > how do you think we could do more?
> > perhaps you could discuss with James Burke on how to have a shareable
> feed
> > appear somewhere on our blog? and perhaps do this in a mutual way? just
> an
> > additional idea
> >
> >
> > the carr article is
> > online:
> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/netarchical-ideologies-and-the-corporatization-and-marketisation-of-free-collaboration/2010/12/02
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 12:38 AM, Neal Gorenflo <neal at shareable.net>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Michel, intelligent and big hearted response that subsumes Carr's
> >> argument in constructive orientation and context.
> >>
> >> Your inquiry here is timely.  While Shareable is more oriented toward
> >> lifestyle content, we do tackle big ideas occasionally.  We've been
> >> discussing how to do this in a more systematic and impactful way.  I
> >> believe that doing this as a community is more effective.  We can
> >> share ideas and then share our web traffic.  This way we get better
> >> ideas and a bigger audience for them.
> >>
> >> One of my big goals at ICC was to connect the commons media people to
> >> catalyze some light collaboration around idea and traffic sharing.  I
> >> made some progress, this is progress, and I'll be looking for more.
> >>
> >> One proven and nearly zero cost method to build an audience online is
> >> to first build a cadre of allies that consistently share traffic (peer
> >> produce our audience).  This is one way that we can bring our ideas to
> >> the center of the global dialog about the future.
> >>
> >> OK, so let me know when your response is up so I can share it ;)
> >> Thanks for your good works!
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Neal
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Neal Gorenflo | Publisher, http://Shareable.net | 415.867.0429
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Michel Bauwens <
> michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi Neal,
> >> >
> >> > this is the commentary I have added to the Carr piece:
> >> >
> >> > "Whatever its exagerrations, Nicholas Carr does point to a real point
> of
> >> > debate and division amongst those that favour openness, sharing, and
> the
> >> > commons as social practices.
> >> >
> >> > It's important to note that these are first of all social practices,
> and
> >> > though these are not value-less, people from different sides of the
> >> > political spectrum can love and adhere to those practices.
> >> >
> >> > People with leftist leanings will typically like the communal aspects
> of
> >> > the
> >> > new practices; while people on the right will love the free
> initiative,
> >> > i.e.
> >> > enterpreneurship, that is linked to these practices; people on the
> left
> >> > will
> >> > insist on the aspects of the new practices that transcend capitalism
> and
> >> > its
> >> > ideology; while people on the right will insist on how it not only
> >> > accomodates with business practices but promotes wealth.
> >> >
> >> > Here I would like to outline the kind of attitude I have favoured
> within
> >> > the
> >> > dialogical community of the P2P Foundation:
> >> >
> >> > the dialogue must be pluralistic and honour all those who approve of
> the
> >> > practice, within the limits of civil discourse
> >> >
> >> > communities, markets and states are all part of our lifeworld, and we
> >> > must
> >> > all deal with it, and somehow accommodate them for the sake of our
> >> > livelyhoods and those of our families, communities, and projects
> >> >
> >> > Nevertheless, I personally add the following basic attitudes:
> >> >
> >> > capitalism, as an infinite growth system that does not take into
> account
> >> > negative environmental and social externalities is not compatible with
> >> > the
> >> > survival of the biosphere and our species, and is headed, at most in a
> >> > few
> >> > decades, towards some form of self-destruction
> >> >
> >> > markets, have pre-existed and will probably survive the destruction of
> >> > capitalism; markets are simply one of the ways to allocate scarce
> >> > resources
> >> >
> >> > communities and commons can accommodate, cooperate and even honour
> >> > market
> >> > players who acknowledge the rules and norms of a commons, and
> contribute
> >> > to
> >> > its sustainability
> >> >
> >> > nevertheless, profit maximisation is unethical and should be subsumed
> to
> >> > ethical goals and the benefit of the common good
> >> >
> >> > peer communities should preferentially choose for those
> enterpreneurial
> >> > forms that honour the value systems of the commons, and even create
> >> > their
> >> > own vehicles, phyles, as ideally, the people who create the value
> should
> >> > also be the people who realize the value
> >> >
> >> > peer to peer is the most economically, politically and socially
> >> > productive
> >> > mode of value creation presently available to humankind and is part of
> >> > an
> >> > important emancipatory process; in the last analysis, this makes it
> >> > incompatibe with the eternal continuation of a system where inequality
> >> > and
> >> > injustice are structrural features
> >> >
> >> > it's aim is to supersede capitalism and to embed market structures in
> a
> >> > higher ethical superstructure that acknowledges the common good
> >> >
> >> > in order to achieve this transformation to a civilisation and
> political
> >> > economy where the commons and peer production are at its core, we need
> >> > to
> >> > develop a new and broad social hegemony, and this entails seeking
> >> > commonality with a wide variety of social forces, including
> progressive
> >> > enterpreneurs, genuine conservatives, including forces thay may
> >> > nominally
> >> > claim they are in favour of 'capitalism' (but in practice mostly mean
> >> > 'markets')
> >> >
> >> > we have to acknowledge that it is frequently a positive thing for peer
> >> > communities in particular, and the growth of peer production
> generally,
> >> > when
> >> > it is taken up by enterpreneurial forces, even as they themselves
> >> > supporters
> >> > of profit maximisation
> >> >
> >> > With all these caveats in mind, it is still important to recognize the
> >> > distinction between those social forces 1) who are simply interested
> in
> >> > 'exploiting' peer to peer practices; 2) want to limit peer to peer
> >> > practices
> >> > to what is compatible with the continued existence of a infinite
> growth
> >> > system.
> >> >
> >> > Netarchical capitalism, as a concept, not only is meant to convey that
> >> > sections of capital, understand the importance of peer production to
> >> > their
> >> > own viability and profitability, but also to denote ideological
> efforts
> >> > to
> >> > keep peer production within the bounds of, and eternally subordinated
> to
> >> > the
> >> > market system.
> >> >
> >> > In my view, then the key to judge the works of people like Don
> Tapscott,
> >> > Steven Johnson and Rachel Botsman, is to go beyond their own focus on
> >> > market-friendlyness but to see whether they honour the autonomy of
> peer
> >> > production communities, the fair exchange between the commons and
> >> > enterpreneurial entities; and if their imaginary is compatible with
> peer
> >> > production and the commons taking a core role in our society, rather
> >> > than a
> >> > subordinated role.
> >> >
> >> > I have not read any of the three works mentioned by Nicholas Carr, so
> I
> >> > have
> >> > to withhold any judgment on this. But even if I would disagree with
> >> > their
> >> > staying within the bounds of the present system, this would not
> preclude
> >> > dialogue and mutual learning.
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > 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
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>

-- 
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20101203/7d46db64/attachment-0001.html>