Certainly agree that it is time to advance this work. I think the working on such exercises and ideas on developed protocols on an open page, may be including interested from lists and networks on the topic, sounds like a good idea. In tandem with the debate on licences and partner state, it would be very complementary. So I would be happy to collaborate on that. May be an idea to have one page for inner-governance, one for between p2p governed distributed networks, and one between distributed/p2p and vertical agency interactions? Orsan On 28 July 2014 08:01, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Orsan,
it is precisely for this reason that we parted with flok
in the longer term, we need to find and focus on the protocols that are necessary to retain equipotentiality in a network ...
perhaps we could work together on identifying those rules ?
it has been on the back of my mind for a few years, see http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:P2P_Hierarchy_Theory and http://www.diigo.com/user/mbauwens/Protocollary-Power ..
It seems to me that the work of Stephen Downes would be a great starting point ..
http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:P2P_Hierarchy_Theory?search=stephen+downes...
for example:
http://p2pfoundation.net/Democratic_Institutional_Design / http://p2pfoundation.net/Knowing_Networks
so my proposal is to have a joint page where we can jot down the rules that maintain true distribution of power
Michel
<<>From the communist manifesto to first international, from Erfurt and Gotha to Comintern the discussion between theses and factions, being formed among groups of friends, based on one important but small faction or an entirely new frame of theoretical-analytical abstraction, took the conflicts between individuals and caused strong and irreversible demarcations between sppousedly emancipatory visions and energies.. May be most of the time very stupid reasons, like money, girl, ego casued these we can't now... Then we (emancipatory peopel) had reproduced the power games of rulers -can be traced easily in the tone of writings of Marx, Engels, Luxembourg, Kautsky, Lenin, Proudhon, Bakunin,... the spirit of the time is gaining respect and authority for argument was full fledged attacks on personality.. plus whatever possible, as may be a result of structural possibilities limiting communication. It killed the true spirit of revolution/emancipation as well as prevented prefigurative ethical politics as such. In my opinion this made it possible for the rulers to survive and evolve into capitalist class agency for itself and gave them advantage. Since they saw that their grave digger were also like them.. since we did reproduce the capitalist form of power accumulation. It is not possible in the same way today, p2p mode of communication allows more open confrontations and conflict resolution processes, egalitarian and ethical - prefigurative relationships, as well as checks and balances. Still there are ways and tricks to gain network power and use it against the 'lower order' nodes? so on these weaknesses there is a work to do. Yet the structurally speaking it is not impossible to solve these problems today>>
-- Please note an intrusion wiped out my inbox on February 8; I have no record of previous communication, proposals, etc ..
P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
Updates: http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
#82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
_______________________________________________ NetworkedLabour mailing list [email protected] http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour