[P2P-es] background to Gordon's report

Jue Jul 10 13:55:35 CEST 2014

Vaya insistencia y vaya tristeza tener que seguir hablando de estas
cosas en listas que no están destinadas a esto. De todas formas, por
alusiones, me siento forzado a responder, aunque sea brevemente.

Lo asombroso es que Michel ya sabe lo que voy a decir, se lo dije a él
repetidamente por mails privados y también a Gordon Cook, hace ya meses.
Antes de nada me gustaría comentar que he intentado suscribirme 3 veces
a la lista internacional de la p2pfoundation pero que no me ha sido
posible, el administrador no da de alta mi inscripción. Creo que ha
Bernardo lo han echado hace semanas sin avisarle siquiera, y sin que en
la lista quede constancia de que se le ha expulsado (pero eso mejor que
lo confirme Bernardo). El caso es que esta respuesta no llegará a la
lista internacional, pero al menos aquí constará.

Al grano. Por lo que yo sé el orden de los acontecimientos es el siguiente:

* Para el proyecto FLOK intentamos hacer algo bonito: pagar a gente para
que escribiera documentos copyleft de políticas públicas en los ámbitos
en los que eran expertas. Liberar renta para los comunes. Eso es
complicadísimo en Ecuador, por lo que era necesario que para cobrar,
esas personas, vinieran a la cumbre y cobraran allí en metálico sus
honorarios (firmaran recibos, etc. ya que es casi imposible pagar a
extranjeros de otra manera, por motivo de todas las mediadas
anti-corrupción y de control de divisas en el país).

* Os podéis imaginar que el proyecto FLOK ha tenido muchos enemigos de
verdad (ministerios de derechas en Ecuador, lobbies, etc.) que operaron
saboteando la administración y los procesos burocráticos. Una verdadera
pesadilla para el grupo de administración, que no podía gastar el dinero
de la cumbre sin el concurso público correspondiente, etc. La licitación
de este concurso público y la empresa que al final asumió los gastos de
viajes, etc. no se pudo hacer hasta apenas una semana (!) antes de la
cumbre. Imaginaros la tensión y el follón.

* El Sr. Gordon Cook tiene necesidades espaciales de salud, por lo que
pedía un billete especial en business class, pero las circunstancias
administrativas lo hacían imposible. En un momento dado él pidió
(exigió) que aunque no fuera business class, al menos que le compraran
el billete al momento, porque tenía miedo de que a pocos días de la
cumbre no pudieran comprarle un billete directo y tenía miedo de que,
con la espalda mal, le tocara un billete con 5 conexiones y un viaje
larguísimo. Comenzó a enviar mails insistentes a los administradores,
que no podían hacer absolutamente nada, simplemente porque no podían
comprar los billetes. Mi billete, por ejemplo, se compró apenas una
semana antes de la cumbre y así con los billetes de todas las invitadas.
Lo que pedía el Sr. Cook era razonable, pero imposible de hacer.

* Esto le sentó muy mal al Sr. Gordon Cook, pero no había nada que
hacer. Entonces comenzaron las acusaciones de que Daniel prefería traer
a sus amigos a la cumbre en lugar de pagarle al Sr. Cook, etc. éste
comenzó a decir que le estaban amenazando (sic!), que Daniel le había
puesto "una bota en la cabeza"... el caso es que no se le había comprado
ningún billete a nadie (no sólo a Cook), sencillamente porque no se
podía. Y entonces comenzó toda una serie de hilos sobre el Estalinismo
de FLOK y que Daniel era una dictador, etc. y evidentemente, se
rompieron las relaciones con este señor. Pero ni se le ha atacado, ni se
le ha amenazado, de hecho se le ha ignorado por un sencillo motivo:
había y sigue habiendo muchísimo trabajo por hacer, y no hay tiempo para
esto.

Es una pena terminar así, pero ya está. Mucha gente se ha ido del
proyecto, por motivos diferentes, incluso criticando el proyecto de
diferentes maneras, pero no se les persigue ni se realiza un "character
assesination" ni cosas así.

Por cierto y para que conste: El documento de políticas públicas que
escribió Gordon Cook está bastante bien. Pero él mismo lo retiró porque
no se le podía pagar, y me parece totalmente razonable. Lo que no
entiendo es todo el drama posterior :(

saludos,

xabier

On 10/07/14 12:40, Michel Bauwens 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.
> 
> 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. 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. 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>
> 
> 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. 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 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.
> 
> However,  I don't think it will be successful.
> 
> My recommendation to the flok mgt is: stop trashing Gordon, it will
> backfire.
> 
> 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
> 
> 
> 
> <<"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
> 
> <http://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/p2p-foundation>Updates:
> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
> 
> #82 on the (En)Rich list: http://enrichlist.org/the-complete-list/
> 
> 
> 

-- 
wget -O - http://sindominio.net/~xabier/xabier.gpg.asc | gpg --import

                   xabier BARANDIARAN   |  http://www.barandiaran.net

"There is no need for fear or hope, but only to look for new weapons"
                                                              DELEUZE