- P2P-Foundation - lists.ourproject.org

Fwd: uk - banks : where-did-our-money-go , pdf, NEF
by Michel Bauwens 03 Mar '11

03 Mar '11

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dante-Gabryell Monson <dante.monson(a)gmail.com> Date: Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 12:17 PM Subject: uk - banks : where-did-our-money-go , pdf, NEF To: econowmix(a)googlegroups.com, hc_ecology(a)yahoogroups.com, sustainable_solidarity(a)yahoogroups.com http://www.neweconomics.org/publications/where-did-our-money-go excerpts : page 8 of pdf : *Public sector support for the banking sector amounts to at least £1.2 trillion* *committed, equivalent to 85 per cent of GDP – the highest level of any* * comparable economy.* * * page 2 : * * * Based on Bank of England data, banks now appear to face a funding cliff. In order to maintain existing levels of activity they currently have to borrow £12 billion a month; the projections we reproduce in this report indicate that in 2011 they will have to borrow £25 billion a month. We believe the public sector is likely, once again, to be asked to bail out the banks for the emerging funding gap. * -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

Fwd: chaordic social organization - project to maximise the collective intelligence of the permaculture movement
by Michel Bauwens 03 Mar '11

03 Mar '11

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dante-Gabryell Monson <dante.monson(a)gmail.com> Date: Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 7:54 AM Subject: chaordic social organization - project to maximise the collective intelligence of the permaculture movement To: sustainable_solidarity(a)yahoogroups.com, hc_ecology(a)yahoogroups.com, econowmix(a)googlegroups.com A pilot project to maximise the collective intelligence of the permaculture movement http://permacultureinstitute.pbworks.com/w/page/15951502/FrontPage <http://permacultureinstitute.pbworks.com/w/page/15951502/FrontPage> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Florence Date: Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 4:33 PM Subject: chaordic social organization To: Hello both of you, you may be interested in this : http://permacultureinstitute.pbworks.com/w/page/15951502/FrontPage Have a look at the videos Spring, soon Flo -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

Fwd: Bitcoin's ecological impact is disastrous
by Michel Bauwens 03 Mar '11

03 Mar '11

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Thomas Greco <thg(a)mindspring.com> Date: Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 8:58 AM Subject: Bitcoin To: Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004(a)gmail.com> Michel, Here's a post from the Open Collective Skype chat about Bitcoin. [05:43:48 PM] permaworld: Does anyone have information or experiences with BitCoin http://bitcoin.org ..... a new peer2peer open source digital currency? If so, what do you think of it? [05:55:27 PM] Arthur Brock: Bitcoin has gotten a lot of things right about decentralization and intrinsic integrity built into the structure of the data itself. [05:56:04 PM] Arthur Brock: However, they've confused issuance of currency with creation of value and are still building for artificial scarcity. [05:58:06 PM] Arthur Brock: It currently takes about 113 days of 100% CPU use to "mine" a bitcoin. You pay for $25 of electricity to generate a coin worth about $18. If the world switches to using bitcoin as a primary currency we can deplete our oil supplies just generating the electricity required issue them. They seem to be trying to simulate gold mining and using Bitcoin as "virtual gold." If they think that scarcity is the requisite feature for a workable currency, then they're way out of bounds. Hope all is well with you, Tom -- Thomas H. Greco, Jr. thg(a)mindspring.com Mobile phone: 520-820-0575 Website: http://www.Reinventingmoney.com Blogs: Beyond Money: http://beyondmoney.net Tom's News and Views: http://tomazgreco.wordpress.com Photo gallery: http://picasaweb.google.com/tomazhg Skype/Twitter name: tomazgreco My latest book, "The End of Money and the Future of Civilization" can be ordered from Chelsea Green Publishing, Amazon.com, or your local bookshop. -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

Fwd: definitions of ( hybrid networked ) modes of governance and economics
by Michel Bauwens 03 Mar '11

03 Mar '11

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dante-Gabryell Monson <dante.monson(a)gmail.com> Date: Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 9:05 AM Subject: definitions of ( hybrid networked ) modes of governance and economics To: In the following excerpt, starting at 378 seconds ( already marked in link ), http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBBqM-ajoGI#t=378s it states the use of polling to inform "democracy" ( or, so called, "representative democracy" ), from information coming from a population that can make "rational" decisions. I wonder how one would call direct action , transactions , and contracts made by the people without a need for a representative, but with the possibility for proxy voting which can be changed at any time in case one would want others to take decisions for us instead of taking them oneself ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proxy_voting ) . How would such form of economics and governance be called, when enabled in hybrid forms of relational dynamics ? I guess not "direct democracy", as democracy is from the rule of the majority. I guess "Panocracy" ? http://p2pfoundation.net/Panocracy A principle underlying systems of organisation that asserts that everyone has the right to make and act on decisions about things that affect them and that no one else has the right to take that away from them. or "Panarchy" ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panarchy *“an inclusive, universal system of governance in which all may participate meaningfully."* -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0

WikiLeaks Clone Takes On Higher Education
by Dante-Gabryell Monson 03 Mar '11

03 Mar '11

http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/a-wikileaks-clone-takes-on-higher-ed… <http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/a-wikileaks-clone-takes-on-higher-ed…>excerpt : <http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/a-wikileaks-clone-takes-on-higher-ed…> *The Australian activists who run UniLeaks are pushing for openness in the face of what they see as the corporatization of higher education. They complain of unprofitable courses abolished, employees made less secure, and students reduced “to mere customers or clients of the university.”* * * * http://www.unileaks.org/index.php how to submit materials : http://www.unileaks.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3&Item… *

1 0

Legally : what is a nation state ?
by Dante-Gabryell Monson 02 Mar '11

02 Mar '11

Perhaps some of us know more about this topic. Is there a legal difference between the status of "Nation State" - its constitution, and its potential recognition by other nation states, and that of the legal status governing such nation State ? >From documents I provide below, it seems that some governments and the legal framework related to the functioning of the current operating states may actually legally be "Corporations" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation Hence what is the relation between the legal status of a Nation State, and that of legal frameworks assuming control over such Nation State ? And what is the relation between humans and/or legal persons, with the original nation state, or with the entity which controls in the form of a state the nation state ? Also , what does it mean regarding supra / trans-national contracts ? And what is the position of humans in relation to these ? ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_international_law ) And what does it mean in relation to "Property" , and the legitimacy of certain laws ? Do they apply ? Or do they only apply if we make a contract - in that case, what is considered as a contract which binds humans to certain of these legal frameworks ? For the United States, Germany, and the UK, I find some of the following documents... ---------------- US : http://www.serendipity.li/jsmill/us_corporation.htm excerpts : *"In essence, this Act formed the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Note the capitalization, because it is important. This corporation, owned by foreign interests, moved right in and shoved the original "organic" version of the Constitution into a dusty corner. With the "Act of 1871," our Constitution was defaced in the sense that the title was block-capitalized and the word "for" was changed to the word "of" in the title."* * * *"The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. I refer you to the "Acts of the Forty-First Congress," Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: "An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia." This is also known as the "Act of 1871." What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land."* --------------------- Regarding the UK : http://tpuc.org/node/558 http://www.tpuc.org/Acts_and_Charters John Harris - 'It's an illusion' talk at the Stoke 'Lawful Rebellion'Conference ---- Regarding Germany : http://vimeo.com/5506711 http://www.google.com/search?um=1&hl=en&safe=off&client=ubuntu&channel=fs&b… Vortrag von Hr. Görlitz zur Rechtslage in Deutschland (2. Fassung mit besserem Ton) In diesem Vortrag beschreibt Herr Görlitz die Rechtslage in Deutschland. Die BRD wurde 1990 durch die Streichung des Geltungsbereichsartikels 23 des Grundgesetzes aufgelöst. Das Deutsche Reich existiert nach wie vor und wird wieder handlungsfähig gemacht. Heutige Beamte der 'BRD' sind seit Auflösung der BRD reine Privatpersonen. Das 'Bundesvermögen' und sämtliche 'Finanzämter' werden von der Firma 'Bundesrepublik Deutschland Finanzagentur GmbH' verwaltet. Gültiges Recht sind die Reichsgesetze, die auf der Weimarer Verfassung vom 11. Aug. 1919 fußen. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grundgesetz_f%C3%BCr_die_Bundesrepublik_Deutsc…

1 0

- Re: "The currency is not the debt"
by Dante-Gabryell Monson 02 Mar '11

02 Mar '11

as for the euro zone, it seems that article 123 of the Lisbon treaty ( follower of 104 of Maastricht treaty ) seems , if I remember and understand properly, to forbid the European Central Bank to directly buy bonds from european states. ( although it did end up doing so lately in the case of Greece ? ) Hence the european central bank only sells its currency ( created out of thin air ? ) to commercial banks ? And european states become dependent on "control" by "the global financial market" to buy their Bonds - as approach to borrow money ? Hence european states at the mercy of the financial markets ? ( and potential speculation ) In both US Dollar and Eurozone currency , I feel there are a number of questions regarding who really has influence on the system, to who it is accountable, and if there is any ( democratic ? ) Sovereignty left ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereignty On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Dante-Gabryell Monson < dante.monson(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Roberto, > > thanks for your reply. > it makes me thinking. > > I ask myself, what is > *"the interest-free currency issued > by governments or their central banks"* > that you mention at the end of your message. > > What is this government interest free currency in the current ( central > bank dollar ) system ? > Is it government bonds ? if so, does the government not buy bonds back by > paying interest ? > > Also, are it "their" central banks, or are central banks ( in europe and > the US ) non-governmental institutions ( controlled by / accountable to ... > ... ? ) > In the states, it seems to be "semi-private" ( which apparently means "not > owned" by the US government - answer I find after googling it ) > > I do have the feeling that it may have been the case in the past, when the > Treasury had control on creating / feeding money into the system through > public spending ( without interest ? ), and then taking it out through taxes > ? "Greenbacks" / "Demand Notes" - for history, see : > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Note > > Yet, in the case of the US central bank dollar, > it seems to be backed by Treasury Bonds, when the Fed buys bonds with money > it creates out of thin air, using tax payers money to guarantee its own > monetary creation ? > And requiring commercial banks to have a certain percentage of this type of > money as guarantee for the credit they issue ? > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 5:36 AM, Roberto Verzola <rverzola(a)gn.apc.org>wrote: > >> I'm trying to understand what Chris Cook is saying below... >> >> There are at least two meanings of credit in finance: credit as debt, >> and credit as in debit/credit, left/right columns in accounting. >> >> He seems to mean the former, except that he asserts that a credit >> instrument is not debt, so apparently not. >> >> If he means the second, accounting people always say that debit/credit >> don't mean anything except left/right, which doesn't make sense in the >> context below. >> >> Would he mean some other thing then? >> >> He seems to distinguish between the "interest-free currency" created by >> the banks (meaning, I suppose, that the banks do not pay any interest >> for this currency) and the debt created when this currency is loaned out >> (for which the banks *earn* interest. At one point, he says banks "spend >> these interest-free currentcy into existence". I could be wrong, but I >> understand it differently: >> >> Banks *cannot* spend the debt-money they create, as far as I know. The >> currency they create has no independent existence *except* as a loan to >> borrowers, and the banks can only spend the interest earnings from these >> loans. So creation occurs *only* at the instant the interest-bearing >> debt is created. As soon as the principal is paid, the currency created >> from it is extinguished. Its interest earnings go to the bank; that's >> what they can spend. >> >> This makes debt-money different from the interest-free currency issued >> by governments or their central banks, which have independent existence >> outside a debt relationship. >> >> At least that's how I understand it. I'd be glad to be clarified about >> this. >> >> Roberto >> >> Dante-Gabryell Monson wrote: >> > This message from Chris Cook is interesting to me... >> > >> > It initially makes me feel there are "different vectors", >> > used as tools, >> > which may have accounting equivalents, >> > and can spark confusion as to what is what ? >> > >> > excerpt : >> > >> > /*" The currency is not the debt, but a credit instrument identical to >> > those issued by government. "*/ >> > >> > plus ci dessous... >> > >> > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> > From: *Chris* >> > Date: Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 3:05 PM >> > Subject: [gang8] ....of Public Credit >> > To: gang8(a)yahoogroups.com <mailto:[email protected]> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Dear Gang >> > >> > I made the following response to someone in a forum on 'Public >> > Banking' who was repeating the fallacy that money is debt. >> > >> > It covers quite a bit of ground, actually, and I'd be interested to >> > see if the Gang can pick holes in it >> > >> > Best Regards >> > >> > Chris Cook >> > >> > >> >> > I'm afraid you share a fundamental misconception in relation to the >> > money created by banks, which is in fact a credit instrument, not a >> > debt instrument. >> > >> > When private banks create credit they create a virtual IOU as an >> > accounting object. This interest-free IOU is a 'look-alike' of the >> > interest-free IOU issued by Central Banks, and is routinely exchanged >> > for such notes and coin in private hands when they are 'deposited' in >> > the banks. It is currency created as an object or thing to which >> > account owners have title. >> > >> > When a private bank lends this currency into existence it is creating >> > BOTH the currency AND the interest-bearing loan relationship with the >> > borrower under a debt contract. The currency is not the debt, but a >> > credit instrument identical to those issued by government. >> > >> > The debt is created in exchange for the use over time of the currency. >> > When a private bank spends currency into existence it creates virtual >> > credit instruments, and 'deposits' these into the accounts of >> > suppliers, staff, management or shareholders by crediting them with an >> > entitlement to these virtual assets. >> > >> > These credit instruments/IOUs are accepted by governments in payment >> > of taxes, and that is what gives them their value. There is >> > functionally no difference between an invoice issued by a private >> > business for private services rendered, and a tax demand issued for >> > government services rendered. >> > >> > Likewise, the issue by government of an undated IOU redeemable against >> > taxes is functionally equivalent to the issue by a private business of >> > an undated IOU redeemable against goods and services. eg Air Miles, >> > Store Loyalty points, or the well known DeliDollars. >> > >> > Government IOUs differ from private ones in that they are made >> > universally acceptable against debts by 'legal tender' laws aka by >> > government fiat. >> > >> > So in a nutshell, governments do not create debt when they 'print >> > money' and spend it. Government IOUs are in fact credit instruments >> > analogous to a form of undated non interest-bearing redeemable >> > preference share. >> > >> > Of course, these credit instruments must be issued and spent sensibly, >> > and not in relation to existing assets, where they will cause >> > inflation as the private banks demonstrated by creating the property >> > bubble. >> > >> > In my view public credit need not be inflationary if used to >> > facilitate the circulation of goods and services and the creation of >> > new productive assets, such as affordable housing; renewable energy >> > and energy saving projects; infrastructure such as transport, schools >> > and hospitals, and of course on training and education of the >> > population to enable them to create these assets. >> > >> > Such public credit creation should be professionally managed by >> > service providers with a stake in the outcome, and accountably >> > overseen by a Monetary Authority (as in Hong Kong, where there is no >> > Central Bank). Once productive assets are created with public credit, >> > they may then be refinanced by private investment in long term credit >> > based upon their productive value (eg rental flows and energy flows). >> > >> > In this way pension investment will enable the public credit used to >> > create new assets to be retired and recycled. Likewise, the newly >> > productive workforce will pay taxes, which again will retire and >> > recycle the public credit which made the workforce productive. >> > >> > >> >> > >> > __._,_.___ >> > Reply to sender >> > <mailto:[email protected] >> ?subject=Re%3A%20%2E%2E%2E%2Eof%20Public%20Credit%20> >> > | Reply to group >> > <mailto:[email protected] >> ?subject=Re%3A%20%2E%2E%2E%2Eof%20Public%20Credit%20> >> > | Reply via web post >> > < >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gang8/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJxNG1xa2JqBF9TAzk3MzU5N… >> > >> > | Start a New Topic >> > < >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gang8/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJlZmxpNDBlBF9TAzk3MzU5N… >> > >> > >> > Messages in this topic >> > < >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gang8/message/15603;_ylc=X3oDMTM2MnNoY2QxBF9T… >> > >> > (1) >> > Recent Activity: >> > >> > Visit Your Group >> > < >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gang8;_ylc=X3oDMTJldTRwN25hBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BG… >> > >> > >> > The gang8 list is devoted to Creditary Economics. >> > >> > >> > Yahoo! Groups >> > < >> http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkdW11ZGVoBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEyM… >> > >> > >> > Switch to: Text-Only >> > <mailto:[email protected] >> ?subject=Change+Delivery+Format:+Traditional>, >> > Daily Digest >> > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Email+Delivery:+Digest> • >> > Unsubscribe >> > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms >> > of Use <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> >> > . >> > >> > __,_._,___ >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > P2P Foundation - Mailing list >> > http://www.p2pfoundation.net >> > https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation >> > >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> P2P Foundation - Mailing list >> http://www.p2pfoundation.net >> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation >> > >

1 0

"The currency is not the debt"
by Dante-Gabryell Monson 02 Mar '11

02 Mar '11

This message from Chris Cook is interesting to me... It initially makes me feel there are "different vectors", used as tools, which may have accounting equivalents, and can spark confusion as to what is what ? excerpt : *" The currency is not the debt, but a credit instrument identical to those issued by government. "* plus ci dessous... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Chris Date: Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 3:05 PM Subject: [gang8] ....of Public Credit To: gang8(a)yahoogroups.com Dear Gang I made the following response to someone in a forum on 'Public Banking' who was repeating the fallacy that money is debt. It covers quite a bit of ground, actually, and I'd be interested to see if the Gang can pick holes in it Best Regards Chris Cook >> I'm afraid you share a fundamental misconception in relation to the money created by banks, which is in fact a credit instrument, not a debt instrument. When private banks create credit they create a virtual IOU as an accounting object. This interest-free IOU is a 'look-alike' of the interest-free IOU issued by Central Banks, and is routinely exchanged for such notes and coin in private hands when they are 'deposited' in the banks. It is currency created as an object or thing to which account owners have title. When a private bank lends this currency into existence it is creating BOTH the currency AND the interest-bearing loan relationship with the borrower under a debt contract. The currency is not the debt, but a credit instrument identical to those issued by government. The debt is created in exchange for the use over time of the currency. When a private bank spends currency into existence it creates virtual credit instruments, and 'deposits' these into the accounts of suppliers, staff, management or shareholders by crediting them with an entitlement to these virtual assets. These credit instruments/IOUs are accepted by governments in payment of taxes, and that is what gives them their value. There is functionally no difference between an invoice issued by a private business for private services rendered, and a tax demand issued for government services rendered. Likewise, the issue by government of an undated IOU redeemable against taxes is functionally equivalent to the issue by a private business of an undated IOU redeemable against goods and services. eg Air Miles, Store Loyalty points, or the well known DeliDollars. Government IOUs differ from private ones in that they are made universally acceptable against debts by 'legal tender' laws aka by government fiat. So in a nutshell, governments do not create debt when they 'print money' and spend it. Government IOUs are in fact credit instruments analogous to a form of undated non interest-bearing redeemable preference share. Of course, these credit instruments must be issued and spent sensibly, and not in relation to existing assets, where they will cause inflation as the private banks demonstrated by creating the property bubble. In my view public credit need not be inflationary if used to facilitate the circulation of goods and services and the creation of new productive assets, such as affordable housing; renewable energy and energy saving projects; infrastructure such as transport, schools and hospitals, and of course on training and education of the population to enable them to create these assets. Such public credit creation should be professionally managed by service providers with a stake in the outcome, and accountably overseen by a Monetary Authority (as in Hong Kong, where there is no Central Bank). Once productive assets are created with public credit, they may then be refinanced by private investment in long term credit based upon their productive value (eg rental flows and energy flows). In this way pension investment will enable the public credit used to create new assets to be retired and recycled. Likewise, the newly productive workforce will pay taxes, which again will retire and recycle the public credit which made the workforce productive. >> __._,_.___ Reply to sender<cojock(a)hotmail.com?subject=Re%3A%20%2E%2E%2E%2Eof%20Public%20Credit%20>| Reply to group<[email protected]?subject=Re%3A%20%2E%2E%2E%2Eof%20Public%20Credit%20>| Reply via web post<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gang8/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJxNG1xa2JqBF9TAzk3MzU5N…>| Start a New Topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gang8/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJlZmxpNDBlBF9TAzk3MzU5N…> Messages in this topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gang8/message/15603;_ylc=X3oDMTM2MnNoY2QxBF9T…>( 1) Recent Activity: Visit Your Group<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gang8;_ylc=X3oDMTJldTRwN25hBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BG…> The gang8 list is devoted to Creditary Economics. [image: Yahoo! Groups]<http://groups.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTJkdW11ZGVoBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzEyM…> Switch to: Text-Only<[email protected]?subject=Change+Delivery+Format:+Traditional>, Daily Digest <[email protected]?subject=Email+Delivery:+Digest> • Unsubscribe <gang8-unsubscribe(a)yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms of Use <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> . __,_._,___

4 4

Re: [P2P-F] FW: Blogpost: Applying the ICT Lessons of Revolt to the Institutional Challenges of Reconstruction: They overthrew Hosni Mubarek, Now Can They Overthrow Robert Michels?
by Michel Bauwens 02 Mar '11

02 Mar '11

This is really brilliant Michael and I warmly recommend it to our listmembers, Michel On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 4:11 AM, Michael Gurstein <gurstein(a)gmail.com>wrote: > Michel, > > I think this is one that you will find interesting... > > M > > --------------------------------------------- > http://wp.me/pJQl5-5Z > > "In this, I think that the revolutions in Egypt and Tunisia have access to > skills and resources which were unavailable to earlier movements that > is-the > Internet, social networking, mobile telephony and perhaps most important, > the experience and knowledge of how to use these in support of collective > social ends." > > -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

4 8

five invitations to use scoop it curation
by Michel Bauwens 01 Mar '11

01 Mar '11

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Scoop.it <contact(a)scoop.it> Date: Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 1:50 AM Subject: Thanks for being a top user of Scoop.it, invite people to join us! To: michelsub2004(a)gmail.com Dear Michel, You became a Scoop.it top user in a very short time: congrats, we’re really impressed! In the name of the entire Scoop.it team, we wanted to thank you for the quality of what you created on Scoop.it. Seeing topics like yours make us really happy we started it. As a way to say thank you and also because we believe it's important to grow while preserving the current spirit of Scoop.it, we're pleased to grant you 5 invites to Scoop.it. Hand them over through the following link: http://www.scoop.it/subscribe?token=MichelBauwens. It's valid for the first 5 persons to use it. And of course, don't hesitate to send us feedback, ideas or critics on Scoop.it. Once again a big thank you! Helene for The Scoop.it Team -- P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss: http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens; http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens

1 0