[p2p-research] problems with the wiki

[Alex Rollin]

Accusing me of wasting time doesn't make it true Michel.  When did you
build your last web application?

How many online communities have you run?

How many users have you signed up in your lifetime?

I have published millions of pages Michel.  I used to get 180 million
impressions a month.

I work here and invite others and clean up the mess.  I re-use the
content.  I'm building on and with the knowledge commons.  Adapt, or
not, whatever.  You are not the only editor.  Nothing I've done has
been destructive or 'deletionist'.  Your metaphor is incorrect.  It is
called collaboration.  This is how you do it, instead of writing about
it.

Alex

On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 4:39 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
> again, I have nothing against transclusions 'as such', but if they are
> problematic for the integrity and diversity of pages of categories I would
> move them,
>
> I suppose you are saying that you are preparing for edit wars and endless
> revisions a la bush-gore wars in the wikipedia ...
>
> sorry if I do not find this constructive, and a bad use of time,
>
> I have another more elegant solution, why don't you create a
> p2pfoundation.com, where you can put all the positivistic content (which I
> applaud and appreciate), but also try out the various technocratic solutions
> and widgets, so that people can try and experiment with them, no quesitons
> asked ... once they are working well there, you can homeopathically
> introduce them, but not impose them, in the main wiki?
>
> It would really be a shame to waste time in edit wars ...
>
> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 9:35 PM, Alex Rollin <alex.rollin at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 3:25 PM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Alex,
>> >
>> > I'm only defensive, because, instead of just listening to users and
>> > authors
>> > of the wiki, you want to impose your solutions, which may be appropriate
>> > for
>> > some users, not for others.
>>
>> These are not dictatorial solutions.  I do listen.  I talked to the
>> guy who wrote the content in question that you copied. You are being
>> inflammatory in addition to being defensive.
>>
>> > I have to be clear in defending the integrity of the content, because,
>> > from
>> > experience, you do not "hear" easily otherwise,
>>
>> You are wrong.  I do hear.  You do not always listen or make clear
>> requests.  You have options.  I do not always do what people tell me.
>>
>> > you do not have to ask permission, but you can't impose ...
>>
>> I do not impose, but I do edit, just like you.
>>
>> > I tried to edit the public property page, and could not, so I ask
>> > patrick to
>> > undo it, it's not complicated
>>
>> Ask a question next time, maybe? instead of ... you know... freaking
>> out, maybe?  Please?
>>
>> > same in the case of the transclusion, I don't want to use this
>> > transclusion
>> > in a particular category, you re-instate and want to impose it, and even
>> > announce a vision of the wiki  that I find horrifying ... a vision which
>> > you
>> > have never discussed with anybody.
>>
>> I can edit the category like other users, yes.  I will probably do it
>> again, too.
>>
>> > I didn't insult anybody, nor made any personal attacks, read again, but
>> > faced with defensiveness and a restriction of the freedom to edit, I had
>> > to
>> > push back,
>>
>> Ah, but you could not judge that all by yourself, though, could you?
>> What do you consider hyperbole, anyways?  Or unchecked assumptions?
>>
>> > I did not see any phrase in the previous correspondence where you
>> > offered to
>> > repair or make good, only defenses that your solution was the proper
>> > one,
>> > that I should follow it, and in case of problems, spent time with the
>> > manual
>>
>> I did undo the edits in a way that reflected your wishes as to what
>> content appeared on the page and informed you by email.  Don't be a
>> pill and make me produce the thread.  Besides, you can see the fix in
>> the edits on the wiki.  Plus I wrote extensive documentation on how
>> the solution works and sent you 3 emails last week and this week
>> asking you to review the protocol.  Don't even try it...
>>
>> A
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
>
>
>
>