<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none"><!-- p { margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; }--></style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr" style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;background-color:#FFFFFF;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<p>Hi George, all<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>@everyone: for those who want to do reviews maybe email George offlist so as to not bother those who do not like 'process' emails. I don't mind them myself but I remember people not being happy about too much technical stuff a while ago - though now that
things are quieter it may be less of an issue? so I don't know argh shut up :-)<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>Concerning the schedule, <span style="font-size: 12pt;">I think </span><span style="font-size: 12pt;">the plan is like this:</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">july 14? - machine shops </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">@maxigas: any news on that front? probably better to avoid releasing in August as many people in the Northern hemisphere are not paying attention as much so if you are not ready maybe delay till September? just a thought</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">dec14/jan15 - law issue</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">july 15 - feminism issue</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">So your issue could slot in between - we would date it back maybe to jan so as to maintain a semblance of order in our release schedule?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">One thing I have been wondering about is: are you still planning to have a first issue describing the FLOK experiment "from the inside" and use that as a base to CFP for a second more critical / general issue about P2P and
the state / government or are you grouping everything into one? </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Thanks for advising,</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">cheers,</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Mathieu</span></p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div style="color: rgb(33, 33, 33);">
<hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000" style="font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b> jopp-public-bounces@lists.ourproject.org <jopp-public-bounces@lists.ourproject.org> on behalf of george dafermos <georgedafermos@gmail.com><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Friday, July 18, 2014 19:04<br>
<b>To:</b> Journal of Peer Production's general and public list<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Vasilis Kostakis; David Vila Vi�as<br>
<b>Subject:</b> [JoPP-Public] JoPP special issue on policy-making for a commons-based society</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">Dear friends and colleagues,<br>
<br>
I'm writing to inform you about the 'development status' of the JoPP special issue on the FLOK policy proposals. According to our original time-plan, the FLOK policy papers, which were the epicentre of the 'Buen Conocer summit' that we organised in Quito at
the end of May, were to be revised and submitted to JoPP by June 31. However, the scope of the revisions turned out to be much larger than was originally anticipated. As a result, about half of the papers are still being revised. And so, Vasilis and I decided
it would make sense to extend the deadline for the submission of manuscripts to Sep. 30. Consequently, the time-planning of the issue would have to be modified as follows:<br>
<br>
- deadline for the submission of papers: Sep 30 (was June 30)<br>
- end of peer review process: Nov. 30 (was Aug 30)<br>
- submission of revised papers: Dec. 30 (was Oct 30)<br>
- issue goes live on the web: Feb 2015 (was Dec. 2014)<br>
<br>
We're hoping this 'deviation' does not conflict with the planning of other JoPP issues. So, please let us know if you have any objections to the above time-plan.
<br>
<br>
On a related note, we're looking for reviewers, so it'd be great if list members could help. The list of papers is as follows:
<br>
<br>
1. open educational resources<br>
2. open science<br>
3. open/free culture<br>
4. biodiversity<br>
5. sustainable agriculture<br>
6. open, distributed manufacturing<br>
7. distributed energy<br>
8. public policy for a partner state<br>
9. public policy for a social economy<br>
10. social knowledge and the social economy<br>
11. ICT & open government<br>
12. free hardware<br>
13. free software<br>
14. connectivity<br>
15. Ancestral knowledge<br>
16. Territorial organisation of the knowledge economy<br>
<br>
So, if you're interested in reviewing any of the above papers, please drop me a line.
<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
-G.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>