[P2P-F] [Networkedlabour] Transnational and P2P Commons Transitions

[Örsan Şenalp]

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 <michel at p2pfoundation.net> 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&title=Special%3ASearch&fulltext=1
>
> 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
> NetworkedLabour at lists.contrast.org
> http://lists.contrast.org/mailman/listinfo/networkedlabour
>