[P2P-F] background to Gordon's report

[Gordon Cook]

xabier is a totally unprincipled liar

he sent me an outrageous private note in May saying that i owed  DV an apology

how laughable.

again if anyone wants got see what is giving xabier such fits

http://www.cookreport.com/pdfs/July-augCRecuadorfinal.pdf


On Jul 10, 2014, at 6:40 AM, Michel Bauwens <michel at p2pfoundation.net> wrote:

> This is a reponse to what Xabier writes about Gordon's report.
> 
> Pardon, demasiado complicado para escribir en espagnol.
> 
> let me first say that I agree that Gordon's report is biased, but that does not make it untrue. It is biased because once  he had been deceived three times in a row, publicly threatened with censorship and non-payment, and subject to an intense campaign of disinformation and lies, which continues to this day, he got understandably angry and started looking for negative information to explain what had happened to him. But that doesn't make the chargnes in the document untrue, it just means they are unbalanced.

Michel looks for the good which is his right.  We both see the same set of facts.  And having been assured that this was good,when i found out it was run by duplicitous raving maniacs i set out to do do my own investigation.  I guess it must be hitting close to home because xabier keeps warning people not to waste their time reading it.

and as far as balance goes, this goes to the critique of mainstream so called objective journalism by glen greenwald.  The duty of the reporter i believe is to show what those in power do not want got be seen

and michel as you well know if you let these rants go unanswered , that would be unbalanced as well

> 
> For balance, and for the record.
> 
> Gordon Cook was promised $4k for a report. This was then unilaterally changed to $3500 on condition that he would come to the summit. Gordon Cook informed that with a spinal operation, it was impossible for him to travel economy in cramped conditions.

to be more precise daniel made it clear that it would not be until a day or two before the flight that i would get a ticket.  when i first looked up flights i found one in economy newark to miami change planes in miami, total travel time 8 hours, price $900.  Economy.  THAT would have been possible.  I told daniel that. Adding that that as it got closer to the time of the event the only things left would have been two or more changes of planes and flight times of 16 to 26 hours caused by layovers in airports of several hours apiece.  THAT would have been physically impossible.

> I was physically present twice when this agreement and promise was made to him, by Daniel Vazquez. When Gordon was informed this promise would not be kept, he was publicly threatened with censorship and non-payment.

the original threats came in private mail.  and yes given the back alley nature of DV mode of operation instead of keeping silent and submitting I quit and this time did so in public and published a verbatim summary of DV's threat. from a private email ….shocking!!!! The irony is that i never asked for business class fare NEVER.  When offered it was in february I said i didn't think i would need it and if they were going to spend the money could it go for a few extra nights at the hotel?  I was told NO.  It is in the budget and what is in the budget can not be changed.  So i said fine and forgot about the issue until it came time to but the tickets.  If one were going to buy business class one can do that a day or two ahead of time and be assured of getting the seat.  THAT is when DV said no business class, never promised such a thing no money in budget and do not send me another email.  If i get one more email from you between now and the summit i will remove you from the project.

> But in fact, since he could not attend without a business class ticket, and he could not be paid without attendance, this effectively meant he would not be payed in effect.


> Now of course, Daniel denies making promise, and I could have been in a mental state of confusion twice, but given the rather systematic non-keeping of engagements, which I can document extensively, I would say occam's razors dictate that a change of mind is the easier explanation. Note that there was no obligation to change that decision, it was a pragmatic decision to spend the money differently, as admitted by DV.
> 
> Gordon was accused of the following things and apologies if they charges sound ridiculous, because of course they are. These charges were leveled internally and privately by DV, and relayed publicly and repeatedly by Bernardo Gutierrez, who continued levelling them even after being informed of facts to the contrary. This is why I wrote the 'parting with bernardo Gutierrez' letter, because it is one thing to spread disinformation out of igorance, or privately, but another thing to continue even when you are aware of the facts.
> 
> 1) Gordon Cook did not exist. Obviously false, since I met him <g>

twice  bangkok march 2010 and new york city october 2011

> 
> 2) Gordon Cook is CIA .. not a shred of evidence
> 
> 3) Gordon Cook was a front for Robert Steele .. well , what can you say ??
> 
> 4) Gordon Cook is a neocon : demonstrably false, read gordon's reporting on progressive telecom and internet infrastructure reform
> 
> Particularly nefarious was the internal disinformation, in which  we were told that Gordon's report was an adolescent rant.

by Daniel or by Jenny Torres?  I don't think I ever sent it to daniel as i had no idea that he was the BOSS.  I was working for jenny and she was always too busy to communicate and i complained frequently to you about this michel.  Jenny had done a connectivity paper as of the first of january …. before i was given the assignment i read it and sent back a detailed critique.  I was very polite, but the paper was what one would expect if the author had no expertise in the subject and used google to research on the basis of what could be found there. She was recommending the philadelphia wifi project as a good example for ecaudor  with no data  that it had FAILED some 3 or 4 years ago.  DV wound up assigning her four papers including one that replaced mine the day before the summit.

the first was fine because it was technically reviewed.  The others?  I was skiing her for guidance after you i and she agreed on my scope of work in a Skype call.  The ONLY GUIDANCE I EVER RECIEVED  came in an emiail on about march 17th. I admitt that my evidence i circumstantial, but the insertion of Jorge Glas the Vice president of the country in CNT and Celec ttrans electric meant that anything that followed the assigned scope of work would raise too many embarrassing questions

> As we had 15 reports to review, this pushed gordon's to the end. Only to discover then that it was rather excellent and took just two afternoons of back and forth to make it into a fine report.
> 
> I have no idea why Gordon Cook was singled out for this particular treatment; why so many lies, why such a systematic breaking of engagements. But the background is the following: 1) as research team we were systematically subjected to such broken engagements, not once, but repeatedly, which is why most of us did not invite our networks to the Summit 2) everyone who was scapegoated in the project was subjected to minor forms of the same treatment.
> 
> Whether Bethany Horne, Andres Delgado, Gordon Cook or perhaps even others, it was not possible to leave the project without being thoroughly trashed, and subject to character assisination, defamation, and disinformation campaigns. I was myself violently attacked without about 99% false accusations by PDS,

who is PDS?

> who subsequently proceeded to wreck the 'urban mesa' and faced a general revolt there; obviously the attacks on my character were kept indoors, but if I had not been protected by my reputation and network, I have little doubt I would be subjected to the same treatment.
> 
> In fact, I was, and Bernardo Gutierrez, after publicly threatening to publish my private emails, also publicly spread false information. For example that I 'defend fora do eixo because I am getting a free PhD from Ivana Bentes'. Though the accusations were mostly ridiculous, they are nevertheless symptomatic of a particular 'paranoid' state of mind.
> 
> So, while Cook's report may be one-sided, his charges are mostly well documented, as acknowledged by Xabier (screenshots, citations); so they may be one-sided, but since they are documented, they are not defamatory, despite xabier's claim. But the undocumented and unproven charges to Gordon, which I outlined above, were definitely defamatory and contrary to truth.
> 
> By treating Gordon so systematically in a dishonourable way, the flok mgt has created a monster that will haunt them forever.
> 
> All the other reports by Gordon, such as the ones on Guifi.net, are well documented and well written and recommended reading. His FLOK report is mostly interesting as an anthropological account of a particular management style. Let's hope it stays confined to Ecuador, but Bernardo's public threats would indicate that there is a danger there is an attempt to export them.

so this is sent to the spanish p2p list? Did you check yourself and see whether bernardo moderates it? Would be interesting to see whether he lets it through.

> 
> However,  I don't think it will be successful.
> 
> My recommendation to the flok mgt is: stop trashing Gordon, it will backfire.

Obvious question…. what are they afraid of?  What are they hiding?  

Also This copy left religion in a situation like this is childlike beyond belief.  It seems to be used in such way as to enable the sponsor to change anything that it don't like.  Where is the integrity of that?

> 
> You will be judged, not how you treat your friends, but how you treat your enemies. and there is something particularly shameful about systematically mistreating an old man with severe health problems and not paying someone for 3 months of research work even though you had the money to do it.
> 
> Other researchers, be warned.
> 
> Please note that despite repeated promises, not one charge of Gordon Cook has been refuted, and probably  because they can't (disclaimer: i have only read the summary and scanned the full report); this is why they attack Gordon as a person.
> 
> The critique that Gordon may have published private emails, is particularly unreceivable given Bernardo's public threat to publish my own private emails.
> 
> Michel

I wonder why there has been so little response here on this general p2p list regarding the ecuador fiasco.  There are some VERY influential people who have not been heard from.  Is this not significant enough to justify any investment of their busy time.

I will say it again if anyone here has any decent contacts in ecuador, please use them to request that the presidents office do a thorough audit of the FLOK projects expenditures.

> 
> 
> 
> <<"Repetidamente he dicho que no pienso entrar a valorar el difamatorio
> pseudo-informe de Gordon Cook. Creo que quien intente leer sus más de
> 100 páginas se va a dar cuenta de lo tendencioso que es: las capturas de
> pantalla, la información privada desvelada sin permiso, incluyendo
> imágenes, etc. por no hablar de lo completamente sesgado de las
> pseudo-entrevistas, a quién da voz y a quién no, de qué manera, etc.
> Todos los Cook Report son copyright restrictivo (modelo de negocio
> basado en consultorías), excepto este, aunque sigue sin poner bien el
> copyleft y es dudosamente copyleft ante la ley. En cualquier caso, las
> sospechas de la parcialidad del documento surgen en cualquier persona
> mínimanente informada y conocedora de los que es el mundo copyleft,
> procomún etc. En fin, no perdamos tiempo con eso Bernardo porque ese
> informe se desvirtúa a sí mismo. Aunque suscribo al 100% lo que
> comentas. Tal como viví las cosas, Gordon Cook se pilló un rebote gordo
> porque no se le pudiera pagar el viaje que necesitaba. A partir de ahí
> comenzó una guerra sin cuartel. Así de triste lo he vivido."
> 
> [en]
> I have repeatedly said that I will not get to appreciate the defamatory
> pseudo-report Gordon Cook. I think anyone who tries to read its over
> 100 pages is going to realize how biased that is: screenshots, private information disclosed without permission, including
> images, etc.. not to mention it's completely biased
> pseudo-interviews, who gives voice and who does not, how, etc..
> All Cook Report are copyright restrictive (business model
> based consultancies), except this, but is yet to put either the
> fine the copyleft and is arguably before the law. In any case, the
> suspicion of bias arise in anyone document minimally informed and aware of the world that is copyleft,
> commons etc. In short, do not waste time with that because that Bernardo
> report undermines itself. Although I subscribe to 100% which
> you comment. As things lived, Gordon Cook caught a fat rebound
> because he could not afford the trip he needed. From there
> started a merciless war. So that sad I have lived.
> 
> -- 
> 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/ 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140710/417119b4/attachment-0001.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Url : https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-foundation/attachments/20140710/417119b4/attachment-0001.pgp