[P2P-es] A parting of ways with Bernardo Gutierrez

[Daniel]

Hola!

Me apena ver que a veces todas (incluso personas muy inteligentes)
pierden o perdemos la perspectiva sobre discusiones/estrategia, entrando
en análisis de pobre calidad más guiados por sentimientos o pesimismo
que sobre posibilidades, personalizando y en negativo frente a la linea
más interesante de analizar en colectivo y pensar en vías de superación,
en acciones que abran el escenario y permitan seguir avanzando con
transformaciones que son un sueño.

Por supuesto, toda crítica o análisis es bienvenido, yo al menos me
permito descartar los que no considero relevantes, por falta de tiempo,
pero tambien ya sea en algunos casos por superficiales o por no incidir
en construcción colectiva.

Quizás lo hago por que es obvio que no existe un proceso de medio o gran
tamaño sin fallos, o porque los personalismos o fallos humanos en una
acción colectiva me resultan irrelevantes, prefiero centrarme más en las
posibilidades que se abren.

Desde ahí, el post de Michel es comprensible, tras un proceso de trabajo
muy complejo en muy poco tiempo como ha sido FLOK me parece más un post
de desahogo de estres que cualquier tipo de análisis meditado, creo que
leyéndolo se ve claro, y que no hay que darle más transcendencia que
esa. Obviamente no es su mejor contribución, pero tampoco tiene porqué
serlo, Michel puede y debe escribir lo que quiera.

A Michel y a Bernardo hay que darles las gracias por lo que han hecho,
incluso aunque ellos o yo nos hayamos equivocado en cosas (imposible no
hacerlo en un reto de 8 meses, debatiendo con más de 1500 personas,
hablando con más de 45 instituciones y decenas de colectivos y decenas
de expertos) han contribuido con sus aportes (al igual que las otras
25-30 personas que también han colaborado directamente, ni más ni menos)
a que ahora mismo un montón de movimientos sociales y académicos estén
debatiendo con las instituciones cómo aplicar las políticas públicas
propuestas que hemos construido de forma colectiva.

Y mientras esa multitud se organiza, debate y construye, algunas miran
nombres y apellidos y se enredan en ver una "telenovela" muy personal;
la pena es que mientras lo hacen o lo hacemos se pierden o nos perdemos
algo increíble, mucho más grande que cualquier nombre y apellido, se
pierden que lo que queríamos que sucediera está sucediendo, las
propuestas de políticas públicas caminan hacia su implementación (no
todas serán posibles, que sean muchas dependerá de nuestra inteligencia
colectiva) en instituciones clave. Los proyectos pilotos van todavía un
poco más atrás y hay que empujarlos, esas serán las prioridades de los
colectivos y expertos Ecuatorianos que la semana que viene comienzan a
trabajar el plan de implementación, un lujo poder verlo :)

Un abrazo, seguimos con temas más interesantes.

P.D: Ahora mismo vivo con 2 compañeros del equipo de investigación de
FLOK, y es un lujo pensar y analizar con ellos, nuestras emocionantes
discusiones van algo más allá de los clásicos atrasos de cualquier
administración pública en realizar pagos, andan apasionados por empujar
los proyectos pilotos que discuten con muchos compis ecuatorianos, ojalá
podemos seguir ayudándoles con eso.







El 05/07/14 09:20, Bernardo Gutiérrez escribió:
> Hello you all
> 
> I think there are several misunderstandings and some unfair accusation.
> Try to be polity and to explain the problems:
> 
>     In the last few days, I have been harassed and threatened by
>     Bernardo Gutierrez, who tried to suppress the publication of an
>     evalution of the FLOK process, which you can find here:
>      http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/a-provisional-informal-assessment-of-the-flok-transition-process-in-ecaudor/2014/07/01
> 
> 
> It is complitily false. Never tried .In fact, it is the first time that
> I know that you published in the blog. Our discussion started when I
> told you that it was not propor to share in FACEBOOK (it is quite clear
> in all of our mails), now, those critics to FLOK process, right now.
> Having had several problems, It is an important moment to know what it
> is going to happen. May it does not help. I valu your version, but
> desagree in several points. Correa (the president) invited the guest of
> the FLOK to the Cambio de Guardia. He spoke about FLOK in Sabatina. We
> were working with high level politicians, as Cancilleria (minister
> Patiño), Senplades and even people from presidency. So, I think it was
> not such an unknow project. In fact, it became, during and after the
> Summit a quite important project for the Whole Ecuatorian Goverment
>  
> 
>     In this text, I simply make a political evalution of my 6 months in
>     Ecuador, as I see it, as I believe was both my right (of free
>     speech), and a duty to the p2p community, who has been asking for
>     it. It is in my view a moderate and considered political evaluation,
>     though of course, as my opinion, open to critique and
>     counter-argumentation.
> 
> 
> I think it is good, Michel, And you are an importante person in the
> process.
>  
> 
> 
>     While I would have accepted a conversation asking me to postpone it,
>     in order to safeguard some potential backroom deal in Ecuador,
>     instead BG thought it would be useful to publicly threaten the
>     publication of my private emails, thinking this would frighten me.
>     It doesn't, as I don't believe I write anything in private that
>     can't see the light of the day. But private email involves other
>     persons and I find it very ethically objectionable that he would use
>     this as a threat.
> 
> 
> Another big misanderstanding. I think it  horrible to publish any
> private conversation. In fact, I am super critic with private
> conversation going public. I was joking and exagerating the fact that
> Gordon Cook violated privacy and made a report with that. Publishing in
> networks some things is not good. So, If you understand that, I am
> sorry. We have more people in that conversation, that probably did not
> undestand that.
>  
> 
> 
>     This is not the first time, a few months ago, Bernardo tried to
>     suppress any balanced treatment of Fora do Eixo
>     (http://p2pfoundation.net/Fora_do_Eixo) and even objected to the
>     mention of chilean groups that were somehow one day, connected with
>     FdO. BG's totally unfounded accusation then was that "I defended FdO
>     because I was getting a free PhD from Ivana Bentes".
> 
> 
> That is a private mail. PRIVATE CONVERSATION, Michel. But, well, I think
> that is my personal opinion, yes. I don´t need to hide it. 
>  
> 
>     It gave me a first insight into his unfair mindset. To be clear, I
>     was not then nor  am I now, neither defending nor attacking FdO, but
>     the p2p-f is conceived as a pluralistic network to show different
>     perspectives on an issue, helping people make their own decisions.
>     We don't want to be factional and choose one side or another within
>     the broad p2p community. I found it strange then that Bernardo was
>     exerting pressure to have only one side of the story seen as
>     legitimate, and refused an open debate on the merits of the
>     critique. I could only be radically against FdO, no nuance was
>     permitted.
> 
> 
> 
> That is not true. I asked you how did you make the list of p2p projects
> of the year. Almost all the node sof Brazil P2P branch were disgusted
> with that, none was consulted. . At the end, we knew it was more your
> list than P2p List. I am specially critic with FdO, but it is on you the
> aproach
> 
> 
>     The second incident came with the aftermath of the FLOK. In the
>     above evaluation, I avoid studiously to mention or critique internal
>     matters, believing that it would only make matters worse. But I have
>     had to suffer there the systematic unfounded accusations against my
>     friends and associates: BG has simply reiterated and continue to
>     spread unfounded accusations against excellent people I had the
>     opportunity to work with : BT,, AD, GC, the research team , the
>     communication team ...
> 
> 
> You are again publishing private conversations. With Gordon Cook we
> argued in the list, that is true. Not the rest. So I will deny that,
> because is quite far from reality. You also make big critics to many
> people (some of this list) in our conversations But I think it is not
> proper to divulgate here, Michel. Private conversation (me and you ) is
> private.
> 
>  
> 
>     What is worse, even when I sent information to BG advising him not
>     to re-iterate these accusations based on facts that I provided to
>     him, he would continue spreading them, totally ignoring the
>     counter-factuals I had sent him. For example, BG has coninued to
>     spread disinfo about Gordon Cook that he is a neocon, opposed to
>     copyleft, and other falsehoods, even after receiving documentation
>     to the contrary.
> 
> 
> I feel sorry, Michel. But Gordon Cook  has been publishing with Copy
> Right ever. He has a lot of problems, health, as well. The problem began
> when he told FLOk that he could only travel in business, because of his
> health problems. The management team tryed, but could no be that. The
> quality of the drafts sent was not good. Neither shape of paper neither
> quality. You did a nice job editing the second one amd transforming it
> into a goog paper. But for many reason, it was impossible to get the
> business ticket. And he started a war. The burocracy was terrible and he
> could not be paid (just coming to Ecuador). Believe that has nothing to
> do with me. After the dirty war he began (violating privacy and laws),
> he deserve to not be paid, in my opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> "Bernardo's attempt to suppress an independent evaluation is a proof of
> the latter. How would a healthy p2p process be endangered by an open
> discussion? The truth is that the flok attempted to create a mythology
> of success, and of political and social support that wasn't there, and
> that Bernardo's highly stage-managed twitter storms were part of that
> effort. "
> 
> I am not trying to suppress anything, Michel! I just told you that it
> was not propor to publish now in Facebook!!! in the moment of the
> reshaping of  the project. I feel really sorry of your accusation about
> communication strategy. A Twitter Storm is a 1% of what we did. We
> created a strong participatory process, wiht personal meetings,
> seminars, speeches. We did wordk shop in 24 cities, with 500 local
> leaders (who were in the summit). we published more than 100 post un few
> months, we did many hang outs (many with researchers), p2pbeer. We
> worked with Cancilleria (international affair minister), with their
> Ecuela Revolución, people from 40 countries. We made meeting in
> squatters (with Restakis, researcher), we made cultural collaborative
> mappings, Mumble meetings etc etc. We presented in MAdrid, in the
> arab-latin american summit, in Media Lab Prado. All of that is
> communication. Communication is conection, and that is what happened. A
> twitter storm never work if there is no network. And we got it, with a
> lot of difficulties. At the begining it was a top down project. It
> became more organic. So, It is not a twitter storm, Michel.
> 
> 
> "The very reason that BG is attempting to suppress an evualuation of the
> FLOK, is that it endangered potential backroom deals. My thesis is: if
> they are endangered by an open discussion, what value do these deals
> ultimately have?
> I'm preparing an evaluative essay on "Hacker Bolchevism, the paranoid
> style of politics in p2p' to critique the non-prefigurative politics
> that were so  characteristic of the FLOK internal process"
> 
> 
> Your critics are necessary. In fact, I respect them. But I think that
> you do them in the wrong places (Facebook, this list, for example). The
> last Facebook schandal, some months ago, when they ought some money, was
> proper and worked. Not this one.
> 
> 
> "Stalinistic tactics have no place in an open p2p culture".
> 
> It is commom sense, Michel. this mail of you, for examplo, is out of
> place in this moment
> 
> "I do not intend to pollute the p2p lists with these personal
> antagonisms (even as they reveal antagonistic value systems and
> political and metholodgical approaches). I will at most respond once to
> the counter-accusations that will undoubtedly follow this, but I can't
> tolerate public and private intimidation when I am  no longer part of
> the flok team".
> 
> Sorry, but I think this is pollution. No one accusated you in any list.
> I never would do it.
> 
> 
> It is me who think you should reconsider your position. We all have
> (researchers, management team, communication team)  done an interesting
> and innovative worlk, begining from you and ending with the secretary.
> It would be a pitty to espoil that
> 
> Best
> Bernardo
> 
> 

------------ próxima parte ------------
Se ha borrado un mensaje que no está en formato texto plano...
Nombre     : signature.asc
Tipo       : application/pgp-signature
Tamaño     : 901 bytes
Descripción: OpenPGP digital signature
Url        : https://lists.ourproject.org/pipermail/p2p-lang-es/attachments/20140705/922978f6/attachment-0001.pgp