[P2P-F] Advice re reputation metrics

Sun Sep 23 19:16:34 CEST 2012

I agree that trust and reputation are important and it would be useful to
have better ways to capture and communicate that kind of information.

ref "the group would allocate a score for individuals over the previous
month based on set criteria" - I don't feel any affinity with any idea
related to grading people.  However I do think we could do with finding out
more quickly "who knows what" and "who else knows how well they know it".

Ref "small groups of 20 to 30 people who would meet once a month" - I agree
the the basis of "reputation and trust" is relationships between people who
have taken time to get to know each other. This can be done online or face
to face. Many people find F2F accelerates relationships. I wouldn't make it
as formal as is suggested. I do think that conversations are the starting
point, and small (low-risk) collaborations are a good practical way to
build trust and reputations. Obviously there are different opportunities in
different fields of work. ( I'm reluctant to speak in generalisation as I
have been doing here as they are so open to misunderstandings.)

I think before we discuss the 'How?" of collecting this kind of information
the important question is "Why do we want to know?" In my own case I want
to know about "someone new" if I need to find someone for something and
there is no-one in my existing network. Then I want to know if anyone else
knows anyone - or can suggest how I can find anyone. Finding out more
effectively who knows possible people and how well could be helpful. It's
been part of "the old boys' network" way of doing things for years, and
maybe we can take the good features of that, and appropriate ICT
approaches, and open things up and be more effective. I think it's more
about network theory than scoring.

Pamela

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: George Pór <george at community-intelligence.com>
Date: 23 September 2012 14:15
Subject: Re: [P2P-F] Advice re reputation metrics
To: P2P Foundation mailing list <p2p-foundation at lists.ourproject.org>

> Reputation metric makes me squirm.  Any form of Scientific Method and I
> mean 'Form" that is attempted is dubious at best, and will fail to garner
> results.  The existential chit chat with colleagues may be more useful.
>

with all the thousands of them, with many of which I've never had and will
have a chance to mee person?

reputation in small, face-to-face groups is easy

when we also want to collaborate in large, global networks of peers, then
we need something more feasible than the existential chit chat, IMHO

george

>
>
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 3:32 AM, Denis Postle <d.postle at btinternet.com>wrote:
>
>>  Hi Robin,
>> I don't know how you would apply it to complementary currencies but
>> various versions of the arrangements you outline have been in place for 17
>> years in The Independent Practitioner Network [IPN] <http://i-p-n.org/>that I belong to in the UK. Smaller groups than you mention, 5-8, meet
>> every six weeks or so. Their task is get to know each other well enough to
>> be able to 'stand by' their work with clients (a reputation 'metric'?). For
>> me the strong version of this derives from 'self and peer assessment'<http://www.human-inquiry.com/asre.htm>based on a list of mutually agreed criteria, which is what you seem to be
>> suggesting.
>>
>> I have written about this extensively, see my forthcoming book Therapy
>> Futures <http://www.pccs-books.co.uk/products/therapy-futures/#> and
>> previously Regulating the psychological therapies.<http://www.pccs-books.co.uk/products/regulating-the-psychological-therapies-from-taxonomy-to-taxidermy/#.UF63CVEpXnj>
>>
>> In my experience your assumption...
>>
>> ... that self-determination, that is, autonomy (intrinsic motivation),
>> relatedness and competence is vital for social justice where for
>> individuals to be self-determining, everyone else must be self-determining.
>>
>> ...is very sound.
>>
>> A critical other dimension is that the distribution of power is
>> constantly under scrutiny, ie that dominance and subordination are
>> eliminated. This doesn't mean that hierarchies of experience and skill are
>> eliminated but that decision making is consensual. A tough task this since
>> domination often seems to me to be in the grain of the times.
>>
>> I hope this helps
>> Denis
>> denisATpostle.net
>>
>> On 23/09/2012 01:00, robin wrote:
>>
>>  Hi All
>>
>> I am researching (via a PhD with the University of Tasmania) the idea of
>> a reputation metric as a currency in a complementary currency project to
>> test whether it would increase trust and other prosocial behaviours in
>> local communities but most importantly to scale up trust between people
>> that don’t know each other. What ideas do people have about how you would
>> structure a reputation metric in practice? My vague ideas at the moment are
>> that you could have resilience circles, small groups of 20 to 30 people who
>> would meet once a month. They would act as support for each other, but also
>> the group would allocate a score for individuals over the previous month
>> based on set criteria for how each have exchanged with other people whether
>> in the group or with others in different groups against the criteria which
>> would attempt to vaguely measure autonomy, competence and relatedness. My
>> research is based on the assumption that self-determination, that is,
>> autonomy (intrinsic motivation), relatedness and competence is vital for
>> social justice where for individuals to be self-determining, everyone else
>> must be self-determining.
>>
>>  Any advice appreciated, eg are there are other groups that I could this
>> to that might be relevant? Do I need to supply more information?
>> Thanks & regards
>> Robin
>>
>>
>>
>>    *Robin Krabbe*
>> *President - North-West Environment Centre*
>> *Convenor - Community Exchange North-West Environment Centre (CENTs)*
>> *
>> *
>> *P.O. Box 999*
>> *Burnie, TAS, Australia  7320*
>> *
>> *
>> *1022 Oldina Road*
>> *Oldina, TAS, Australia  7325*
>> *
>> *
>> *Ph. 03 6438 1454*
>> *Mob. 0421 461 724*
>> *Fax. 03 6438 1455*
>> *rkrabbe at westnet.com.au*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> P2P Foundation - Mailing listhttp://www.p2pfoundation.nethttps://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
>>
>>
>> --
>>  *THERAPY FUTURES* - Obstacles and Opportunities - Introducing the
>> psyCommons
>> pre-order from PCCS Books <http://www.pccs-books.co.uk/>
>>
>>  The Mind Gymnasium FREE ebook Library <http://www.mind-gymnasium.com/>
>> A unique digital resource for Personal and Professional development
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>

_______________________________________________
P2P Foundation - Mailing list
http://www.p2pfoundation.net
https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20120923/f7ca6689/attachment.htm 