- JoPP-Public - lists.ourproject.org

epub version
by fauno 05 Jan '16

05 Jan '16

hi, i made an epub version of issue #6, since i read mostly from my ebook reader and wanted to catch up. i'm sharing it here in case anyone finds it useful :) the plan is to make one per issue, though it requires considerable work (30 minutes correcting format! :P) epub: https://share.riseup.net/#J7t-UmJQL7Sezp9gBLq8wQ markdown: https://share.riseup.net/#4LfndDzti9ahqMEouYq7Dw html to markdown: `pandoc -t markdown REPLACE_WITH_URL > article.markdown` markdown to epub: `pandoc -o issue6.epub issue6.markdown` -- .oÓ)

2 3

site under maintenance
by fauno 04 Jan '16

04 Jan '16

hi, i've noticed the site is under maintenance and it mentions the pdf versions are unavailable, but have you noticed the html versions point to an empty article? at least for issues #6 and #7 can i help? :) -- http://lainventoria.com.ar

2 2

Call for Papers: Decentralizing the Commons
by Mathieu ONeil 14 Dec '15

14 Dec '15

Call for Papers: Decentralizing the Commons We are witnessing today a steady growth in the impact of user-generated content and peer-production on the so-called sharing or collaborative economy. These emergent practices are an indicator of radical changes in the mode of production in an age of ‘prosumerism’, characterized by two main trends. On the one hand, corporations such as Google, Uber or Facebook are capturing the value created by the actors contributing to the collaborative economy, in a way that has been described by some scholars as an exploitation of free labour. On the other hand, projects such as Wikipedia or GNU/Linux are emblematic of a new model of production that relies on the contribution of many individuals collaborating to a collective project that is not owned by any given entity but rather by the community as a whole (Commons-Based Peer Production or CBPP). These individuals organise themselves without relying on traditional hierarchical and mercantile organisational structures, to produce a set of commons resources which are made freely available to the public for use and reuse. In the last few years, CBPP has expanded beyond the field of software and encyclopedias to also cover the realms of information (OpenStreetMap, Wikihow), hardware (FabLabs, Open Source Ecology), accommodation (Couchsurfing, BeWelcome) and currency (Bitcoin, Altcoins). The concept of decentralisation is a key requisite for the protection of thesecommons — from their governance system, including the allocation of power and functions in the organisation of labour; to the characteristics of the socio-technical means of collaboration, in terms of both the underlying technical infrastructure and the ownership structure of such infrastructure. Despite the original design of the Internet as a decentralized network, with the advent of the Web 2.0, centralized (and often proprietary) platforms — typically driven by corporate interests — have progressively taken over the web. These centralized choke-points can be used by governments to increase surveillance (as disclosed by the Snowden revelations), to blackout the Internet (e.g. Egypt, Syria, or San Francisco’s BART), or to restrict the activities of activist organizations (such as Wikileaks). It has now become clear that it is not enough to develop free/libre/open source (FLOSS)alternatives, if we do not as well endeavor to re-decentralize the Internet. Newdecentralized software tools may ultimately be useful to support the operation and the long-term sustainability of CBPP communities. In view of this, we organised the second FLOSS4P2P workshop <http://www.p2pvalue.eu/2nd-floss4p2p-workshop> (@Fablab London, supported by P2Pvalue <http://p2pvalue.eu/>), gathering a wide spectrum of people working ondecentralized FLOSS projects that could help or support the activities of peer production communities. Given the success of the workshop <http://p2pvalue.eu/floss4p2p-workshop-agenda>, we would like to prepare a book in collaboration with the Institute of Network Cultures <http://networkcultures.org/> (on the model of the former MoneyLab Reader <http://networkcultures.org/blog/publication/moneylab-reader-an-intervention…>) to explore the topic of decentralisation in thecommons sector. We welcome proposals from academics, activists, researchers and practitioners interested in exploring the topic from a wide set of perspectives, ranging from computer science, engineering, sociology, philosophy, organisational theory, cultural studies, digital studies, etc. Contributions can cover a variety of topics, including tools for grassroots communities, commons-based peer production, both online and offline wikis, maker culture, activism, hacktivism, free culture, citizen science and hospitality exchange. Contributions can take a variety of formats, e.g. a story, a sci-fi tale, a comicstrip, a manifesto, a critical essay, an interview, a study, a poem, a conversation, a debate, a combination of the former… we would like you to experiment and surprise us! We invite you to submit an initial abstract (max. 750w; count each image as 200w, if any) explaining your idea by January 30, 2016. Examples of possible topics are: - Dynamics of (de)centralization in CBPP communities - Decentralized software applications for online/offline communities - Decentralized solutions to tackle specific communities concerns - Guidelines for developers and/or researchers - Comparison of centralized/decentralized processes in CBPP (e.g. decision-making, infrastructure ownership, value generation, value distribution) - Practical experiences around centralized/decentralized structures (in the form of stories, research, interview, etc.) The more compelling ideas will be selected to be included in the book. Please upload your contribution using the following Easychair link: https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=floss4p2p If you have further questions about the expected content, format, etc. do not hesitate to let us know. We look forward to hearing about your ideas! Primavera De Filippi Samer Hassan David Rozas ----

1 0

Deadline for peer production and work CFP extended
by Mathieu ONeil 12 Dec '15

12 Dec '15

Deadline extended to Friday 7 August 2015 CFP - Journal of Peer Production Peer Production and Work Editors: Phoebe Moore (Middlesex University London), Mathieu O'Neil (University of Canberra), Stefano Zacchiroli (University Paris Diderot) Details below. http://peerproduction.net/peer-production-and-work/

2 1

# In solidarity with Library Genesis and Sci-Hub
by Mathieu ONeil 02 Dec '15

02 Dec '15

Hi all Reposting from AIR cheers Mathieu -)-)-)-)- Hello everyone, I am forwarding this initiative by Marcel Mars and others following the recent court case initiated by Elsevier against LibGen and SciHub. I am unfortunately not following these developments closely enough but I believe strongly that it is of interest to Air peeps and other academic communities. Please do consider spreading their message further even if you don’t agree but think that this is something we should be discussing and engaging in actively. Best, Seda # In solidarity with Library Genesis and Sci-Hub In Antoine de Saint Exupéry's tale the Little Prince meets a businessman who accumulates stars with the sole purpose of being able to buy more stars. The Little Prince is perplexed. He owns only a flower, which he waters every day. Three volcanoes, which he cleans every week. "It is of some use to my volcanoes, and it is of some use to my flower, that I own them," he says, "but you are of no use to the stars that you own". There are many businessmen who own knowledge today. Consider Elsevier, the largest scholarly publisher, whose 37% profit margin[^1] stands in sharp contrast to the rising fees, expanding student loan debt and poverty-level wages for adjunct faculty. Elsevier owns some of the largest databases of academic material, which are licensed at prices so scandalously high that even Harvard, the richest university of the global north, has complained that it cannot afford them any longer. Robert Darnton, the past director of Harvard Library, says "We faculty do the research, write the papers, referee papers by other researchers, serve on editorial boards, all of it for free … and then we buy back the results of our labour at outrageous prices."[^2] For all the work supported by public money benefiting scholarly publishers, particularly the peer review that grounds their legitimacy, journal articles are priced such that they prohibit access to science to many academics - and all non-academics - across the world, and render it a token of privilege[^3]. Elsevier has recently filed a copyright infringement suit in New York against Science Hub and Library Genesis claiming millions of dollars in damages.[^4] This has come as a big blow, not just to the administrators of the websites but also to thousands of researchers around the world for whom these sites are the only viable source of academic materials. The social media, mailing lists and IRC channels have been filled with their distress messages, desperately seeking articles and publications. Even as the New York District Court was delivering its injunction, news came of the entire editorial board of highly-esteemed journal Lingua handing in their collective resignation, citing as their reason the refusal by Elsevier to go open access and give up on the high fees it charges to authors and their academic institutions. As we write these lines, a petition is doing the rounds demanding that Taylor & Francis doesn't shut down Ashgate[^5], a formerly independent humanities publisher that it acquired earlier in 2015. It is threatened to go the way of other small publishers that are being rolled over by the growing monopoly and concentration in the publishing market. These are just some of the signs that the system is broken. It devalues us, authors, editors and readers alike. It parasites on our labor, it thwarts our service to the public, it denies us access[^6]. We have the means and methods to make knowledge accessible to everyone, with no economic barrier to access and at a much lower cost to society. But closed access’s monopoly over academic publishing, its spectacular profits and its central role in the allocation of academic prestige trumps the public interest. Commercial publishers effectively impede open access, criminalize us, prosecute our heroes and heroines, and destroy our libraries, again and again. Before Science Hub and Library Genesis there was Library.nu or Gigapedia; before Gigapedia there was textz.org; before textz.org there was little; and before there was little there was nothing. That's what they want: to reduce most of us back to nothing. And they have the full support of the courts and law to do exactly that.[^7] In Elsevier's case against Sci-Hub and Library Genesis, the judge said: "simply making copyrighted content available for free via a foreign website, disserves the public interest"[^8]. Alexandra Elbakyan's original plea put the stakes much higher: "If Elsevier manages to shut down our projects or force them into the darknet, that will demonstrate an important idea: that the public does not have the right to knowledge." We demonstrate daily, and on a massive scale, that the system is broken. We share our writing secretly behind the backs of our publishers, circumvent paywalls to access articles and publications, digitize and upload books to libraries. This is the other side of 37% profit margins: our knowledge commons grows in the fault lines of a broken system. We are all custodians of knowledge, custodians of the same infrastructures that we depend on for producing knowledge, custodians of our fertile but fragile commons. To be a custodian is, de facto, to download, to share, to read, to write, to review, to edit, to digitize, to archive, to maintain libraries, to make them accessible. It is to be of use to, not to make property of, our knowledge commons. More than seven years ago Aaron Swartz, who spared no risk in standing up for what we here urge you to stand up for too, wrote: "We need to take information, wherever it is stored, make our copies and share them with the world. We need to take stuff that's out of copyright and add it to the archive. We need to buy secret databases and put them on the Web. We need to download scientific journals and upload them to file sharing networks. We need to fight for Guerilla Open Access. With enough of us, around the world, we'll not just send a strong message opposing the privatization of knowledge — we'll make it a thing of the past. Will you join us?"[^9] We find ourselves at a decisive moment. This is the time to recognize that the very existence of our massive knowledge commons is an act of collective civil disobedience. It is the time to emerge from hiding and put our names behind this act of resistance. You may feel isolated, but there are many of us. The anger, desperation and fear of losing our library infrastructures, voiced across the internet, tell us that. This is the time for us custodians, being dogs, humans or cyborgs, with our names, nicknames and pseudonyms, to raise our voices. Share this letter - read it in public - leave it in the printer. Share your writing - digitize a book - upload your files. Don't let our knowledge be crushed. Care for the libraries - care for the metadata - care for the backup. Water the flowers - clean the volcanoes. ---- [^1]: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0127502<https://www.canberra.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=YA6Bzf5FvZEXftQNxa6EWSFBubL…>, http://svpow.com/2012/01/13/the-obscene-profits-of-commercial-scholarly-pub…<https://www.canberra.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=GFhRWCsoFBzD3LxVlK5kTpVbdD6…> [^2]: http://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/apr/24/harvard-university-journal-p…<https://www.canberra.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=eVkHLzqXqu0lSg9zbPVx4MmvbQj…> [^3]: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/10/20121017558785551.html<https://www.canberra.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=Ic8K-FzH8z9IMOzrQ0m1JElGzd1…> [^4]: https://torrentfreak.com/sci-hub-tears-down-academias-illegal-copyright-pay…<https://www.canberra.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=q7iOa2Qyt192uwpLxzi50fMLWDK…> [^5]: https://www.change.org/p/save-ashgate-publishing<https://www.canberra.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=vAwyvBrGpZt3UUVbfTWaFcZWFXm…> [^6]: http://thecostofknowledge.com/<https://www.canberra.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=iFkdZNFSBdQQsn5qGx-vCDmQwJa…> [^7]: In fact, with the TPP and TTIP being rushed through the legislative process, no domain registrar, ISP provider, host or human rights organization will be able to prevent copyright industries and courts from criminalizing and shutting down websites "expeditiously". [^8]: https://torrentfreak.com/court-orders-shutdown-of-libgen-bookfi-and-sci-hub…<https://www.canberra.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=aZVTndiE-tcxxzin8GI-KqWhDeU…> [^9]: https://archive.org/stream/GuerillaOpenAccessManifesto/Goamjuly2008_djvu.txt<https://www.canberra.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=Fst_bIATzXq3B-uX1vVQuBzGdko…> If you want to disseminate further: on twitter it says: http://custodians.online<https://www.canberra.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=_jji_xpuZhESswOBOSCtKPykeDB…> 4LibGen&Sci-hub: share this letter, read it in public, care for the libraries, water the ?????, clean the volcanoes. on facebook: "<https://www.canberra.edu.au/owa/UrlBlockedError.aspx>http://custodians.online In Solidarity with Library Genesis and Sci-hub Share this letter - read it in public - leave it in the printer. Share your writing - digitize a book - upload your files. Don't let our knowledge be crushed. Care for the libraries - care for the metadata - care for the backup. Water the ????? - clean the volcanoes." if you want to check few more variations or add your own, please: https://textb.org/t/bullhorn/<https://www.canberra.edu.au/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=g5kzHEwp9m8wwxvm7f4vXmhdrAr…> -)-)-)-)-

2 1

Labour out of Control: The Political Economy of Capitalist and Ethical Organizations
by Mathieu ONeil 30 Nov '15

30 Nov '15

Hi all Some might be interested in the following paper which was just officially published. cheers Mathieu =-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Mathieu O'Neil "Labour out of Control: The Political Economy of Capitalist and Ethical Organizations" Organization Studies, December 2015, vol. 36 no. 12, 1627-1647 Abstract Digitally networked voluntary associations such as free software projects and Wikipedia can be distinguished from capitalist firms in two respects. First, their predominant logic is 'ethical'. Participation is primarily motivated by self-fulfilment and validated by a community of peers, rather than by earning wages. Second, their governance is 'modular', understood in a design sense (decomposable blocks sharing a common interface), but also in political economy terms: participants oppose restricted ownership and control by individually socializing their works into commons. In recent years capitalist-centralized firms have increasingly engaged with ethical-modular organizations, in some cases paying wages to participants (such labour is thus both 'alienated' or sold, and 'communal', as workers freely cooperate to produce commons). This article reviews the literature dealing with the relationship of these two organizational types. It argues that the manner in which scholars approach a central characteristic of ethical-modular organizations - participants relinquish exclusive property rights over the resource they have created - leads to highly diverse interpretations. Four hypotheses are presented. A 'panoptic' view overlooks the abjuration of exclusive property rights, so that ethical-modular organizations can be defined as a variant of the evolution of capitalist firms into post-bureaucratic networks. 'Skeptics' view this abjuration as irrelevant, and ethical-modular organizations as increasing worker exploitation. In contrast, 'activists' celebrate the abjuration of exclusive property rights, and present ethical-modular organizations as key actors in a historical process leading to the disappearance of capitalism and hierarchy. Finally 'reformists' suggest that the co-optation of communal labour by firms will benefit business practices and society. The article examines the analytical focus of each hypothesis in terms of labour, loss of control by firms over workers, and societal impact. Where appropriate, it raises questions and objections. The conclusion addresses communal labour's effective dependence on capitalist-centralized firms and suggests factors which may contribute to its emancipation.

1 0

extended deadline 13 dec, CfP DIY-antropocene, 4-6 March 2016
by Johan Söderberg 20 Nov '15

20 Nov '15

CfP: Winter Symposium: "Appropriating Technology For Societal Change" 4-6th of March, 2016 Study Circle 6 of the Nordic Summer University (NSU) holds its winter symposium on: Do-It-Yourself in Anthropocene: New Political Imaginaries A planetary, ecological collapse threatens to end the world as we know it. International negotiations are being held without results. Both in the engineering community and in the ecology movement , attempts are made to develop alternatives from below. The training of technophile engineers and technophobic environmentalists places them in opposite camps on most issues. What these two communities have in common, however, is a shared problematic (i.e. technology) and a Do-it-yourself attitude towards societal problems. Under the pressure of a perpetual, ecological crisis, a hybrid imaginary is emerging. A case in point is the establishment of 'open source ecology villages' in the countryside in the US, in Ireland and in Spain. Another example is initiatives to secure food sovereignty through open sourced, automated greenhouses, tailored for the needs of urban dwellers. In either case, the universalistic aspiration of the engineering culture meets the particularism and the small-is-beautiful philosophy of the environmentalists. This nascent movement articulates a new cultural imaginary, utopic and apocalyptic at the same time. The winter session of study circle no. 6 will explore this new imaginary, its promises and pitfalls. In order to participate at the winter symposium, submit your proposal to one of the coordinators of the circle before December 13, 2015. We accept applications for presentations of papers and workshops as well as just participation. Please submit a short description (a few hundred words) of the paper or workshop you intend to present at the seminar together with a short bio. We welcome a range of topics and presentations, from engineering and the social sciences to more experience-based and practically oriented interventions. We strive for a mixture of participants, including academics, students, practitioners and activists, as well as in disciplinary background. The symposium will be held in the extended Göteborg area in Sweden, from Friday 4th till Sunday 6th of March. Participation fee is 500 SEK (50 euro). It covers food and accommodation. It might also be possible to apply for travel subventions, conditioned on available funds. For more information about the circle, please contact the coordinators. Johan Söderberg: johan [dot] soderberg [at] sts [dot] gu [dot] se Gustav Eek: gustav [dot] eek [at] fripost [dot] org Website: http://nordic.university/study-circles/appropriating-science-and-technology…

1 0

Update: website; core team; new editor; schedule, p2pf
by Mathieu ONeil 10 Nov '15

10 Nov '15

Hi all A message to update on recent developments: As mentioned previously, the JoPP website has been compromised and an emergency theme has been put in place. Javier from P2P Foundation and Peter Troxler have been working to fix this. As Peter is becoming more heavily involved in the journal we invited him to join the core team and he accepted. Of course he will contribute more than CMS support. The core team now comprises: Peter, Sophie, Johan, Maurizio, Sara, Nate, maxigas and Mathieu. Panos introduced himself a while ago and no-one objected so he is now officially an editorial board member. Welcome Panos! Because of the bad current look of the website, we are proposing to delay the femhack issue release until January 2016 and the eds for that issue agreed. This will give more time for the situation to normalise, traffic to resume etc. So after there would be: June/July 2016 Alternative Internets Dec/Jan 2017 Work June/July 2017 Urbanism We hope this is OK for everyone. Please advise if any issues. Finally, we have written to the P2P foundation folks in order to clarify our relationship with them and assess to what extent they are willing / able to support us in a more systematic way. We will apprise this list of any developments on that front. cheers, Mathieu (for the JoPP core team)

1 0

CfP: Winter Symposium: "Appropriating Technology For Societal Change"
by Johan Söderberg 05 Nov '15

05 Nov '15

CfP: Winter Symposium: "Appropriating Technology For Societal Change" 4-6th of March, 2016 Study Circle 6 of the Nordic Summer University (NSU) holds its winter symposium on: Do-It-Yourself in Anthropocene: New Political Imaginaries A planetary, ecological collapse threatens to end the world as we know it. International negotiations are being held without results. Both in the engineering community and in the ecology movement , attempts are made to develop alternatives from below. The training of technophile engineers and technophobic environmentalists places them in opposite camps on most issues. What these two communities have in common, however, is a shared problematic (i.e. technology) and a Do-it-yourself attitude towards societal problems. Under the pressure of a perpetual, ecological crisis, a hybrid imaginary is emerging. A case in point is the establishment of 'open source ecology villages' in the countryside in the US, in Ireland and in Spain. Another example is initiatives to secure food sovereignty through open sourced, automated greenhouses, tailored for the needs of urban dwellers. In either case, the universalistic aspiration of the engineering culture meets the particularism and the small-is-beautiful philosophy of the environmentalists. This nascent movement articulates a new cultural imaginary, utopic and apocalyptic at the same time. The winter session of study circle no. 6 will explore this new imaginary, its promises and pitfalls. In order to participate at the winter symposium, submit your proposal to one of the coordinators of the circle before November 15, 2015. We accept applications for presentations of papers and workshops as well as just participation. Please submit a short description (a few hundred words) of the paper or workshop you intend to present at the seminar together with a short bio. We welcome a range of topics and presentations, from engineering and the social sciences to more experience-based and practically oriented interventions. We strive for a mixture of participants, including academics, students, practitioners and activists, as well as in disciplinary background. The symposium will be held in the extended Göteborg area in Sweden, from Friday 4th till Sunday 6th of March. Participation fee is 500 SEK (50 euro). It covers food and accommodation. It might also be possible to apply for travel subventions, conditioned on available funds. For more information about the circle, please contact the coordinators. Johan Söderberg: johan [dot] soderberg [at] sts [dot] gu [dot] se Gustav Eek: gustav [dot] eek [at] fripost [dot] org Website: http://nordic.university/study-circles/appropriating-science-and-technology…

1 0

Re: [JoPP-Public] Sponsorship to the JoPP board
by panayotis antoniadis 27 Oct '15

27 Oct '15

Dear Mathieu, all, Thank you very much for this invitation. It is a great honor for me to be part of the JoPP board. I have been working on the general topic of peer-to-peer systems since my master on the design and implementation of distributed systems (engineering), and then continued with the design of incentive mechanisms for p2p file sharing, among other p2p systems, for my PhD (economics). During my post-doc in Paris I shifted to incorporating ideas from behavioural and social sciences for encouraging cooperation in wireless community networks, and ended up to urban studies, the design of "hybrid space" and the slow development of an interdisciplinary research project along these lines together with my collaborator, and wife, Ileana Apostol, who is an urban planner. See http://nethood.org and http://www.tik.ee.ethz.ch/~pantonia/ for CVs, publications, talks, etc. Recently, we have both quit ETH Zurich and founded a non-profit organization, NetHood, through which we had two successful EU Horizon 2020 applications and two 3-year projects will be starting in January 2016: http://mazizone.eu & http://netcommons.eu In the mean time, through the organization of various interdisciplinary events I got involved in two very interesting related, and "real", case studies: - complementary currencies, and especially the Sardex network in Sardinia, from where I write this e-mail (see http://compare-network.net/sardinia/) - cooperative housing, and especially the young cooperative housing and living projects in Zurich (http://o500.org is an under construction web site, which I am developing in cooperation with P.M., http://o500.org/pm.html and with Ileana we are members of the latest under development cooperative housing project, NeNa1, http://o500.org/pechakucha.html) As for my role as a board member, I am already a co-editor of the upcoming special issue on "Alternative Internets" and with Penny and Nikos Anastasopoulos we are preparing a call for papers for another issue on "P2P urbanism". I think that my main contribution will be mostly on the interdisciplinary perspective and hopefully also on bringing closer research and action (btw, I am also an active member of INURA, http://inura.org) Best regards, Panayotis, or Panos :-) On 21.10.2015 04:06, Mathieu ONeil wrote: > Hi Penny, all > > The official duties of board members are: > > 1. commit to reviewing (if called on) two papers per year, and > > 2. contribute to the development of the journal. This can be done through posting on this list, publicising the journal, or coming up with ideas for articles, projects, or special issues - for example, I don't know, an issue on peer production and urbanism sounds like a great idea. ;-) > > Hope this helps, > > cheers, > > Mathieu > > > > ________________________________________ > From: TRAVLOU Penny<p.travlou(a)ed.ac.uk> > Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 9:56 > To: Mathieu ONeil > Cc:[email protected]; Journal of Peer Production's Editorial team list > Subject: RE: Sponsorship to the JoPP board > > Dear Mathieu, > > Many thanks for sponsoring me to be a member of the JoPP board; very much appreciated. It would be great to send us some further information on our role as JoPP board members. > > Best, > > Penny > ________________________________________ > From: Mathieu ONeil [mathieu.oneil(a)anu.edu.au] > Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2015 05:50 > To: TRAVLOU Penny > Cc:[email protected]; Journal of Peer Production's Editorial team list > Subject: Sponsorship to the JoPP board > > Dear Penny and Panos- > > > I am writing to tell you that (as discussed with Penny a few months ago) I propose to do the following: > > > 1. subscribe you to the Journal of Peer Production (JoPP) general and public list; > > > 2. on that list, sponsor you to become JoPP board members and invite you to briefly present your research interests and intended contribution to the journal. > > > Please let us know if there is an issue with any of the above. > > > cheers, > > > Mathieu (on behalf of the JoPP core team) > > > > > -- > The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in > Scotland, with registration number SC005336. >

2 1