[p2p-research] commentary to nicholas carr piece

Michel Bauwens michelsub2004 at gmail.com
Sat Dec 4 03:10:47 CET 2010 

Hi Neal,

James told me he would have a skype around this on Monday,

here are some of the possibilities I see:

- feed of shareable updates via our regular blog, and/or Ning blog

- feed of shareable updates to appear in our wiki section
http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Sharing


Separately, your proposal for a blog alliance, waiting for your first five,
then we'll add our list,

Michel

On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Neal Gorenflo <neal at shareable.net> wrote:

> Just want to add that while what I've proposed sounds kind of
> mechanical, it's also a chance to inspire each other on a more regular
> basis in ways that I can't guess right now.
>
> I'm in this for impact, sure, but I can't last in this work unless I
> create excellent experiences for myself and others.  And in my life
> that has always, always meant working with inspiring, generous,
> committed and highly creative people like you.
>
> Just wanted to put that out there on a Friday ;) Have a great weekend.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Neal
>
> --
>
> Neal Gorenflo | Publisher, http://Shareable.net | 415.867.0429
>
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Neal Gorenflo <neal at shareable.net> wrote:
> > Hi Michel,
> >
> > My top picks are mostly y'all!  What I list below are people that
> > would share something on their blog / social media if I asked or they
> > share regularly anyway.
> >
> > -Rachel Botsman, Collaborative Consumption
> > -On the Commons
> > -P2P Foundation
> > -Commons Blog
> > -Punsri, Rentalic.com
> > -Mira Luna, TrustCurrency blog
> >
> > I'm actually surprised by how small this list is.  The reason is that
> > round 50% of our traffic is referrals from other sites.  The large
> > majority of referrals do not represent strong ties.  In most cases,
> > any sharing site owners do is strictly voluntary based on the merit
> > they seen in our work.  Fair enough.  But it's also a challenge
> > because this traffic can't be counted on.  Therefore, our traffic
> > varies dramatically month to month.
> >
> > I guess it's natural that we start with a small group ;)  Even if our
> > group is small, I bet that the amount of traffic we generate
> > collectively is substantial and certainly much more than any one group
> > generates by itself.  This is the abundance that we can tap by working
> > together.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Neal
> >
> > --
> >
> > Neal Gorenflo | Publisher, http://Shareable.net | 415.867.0429
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 12:53 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> 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
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>



-- 
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/20101204/0736ce72/attachment.html>

More information about the p2presearch mailing list