hi mathieu and cspp peoples,
glad the journal is almost ready!
last month i presented in amsterdam at the economies of the
commons 2.
it was partly organised by geert's INC, but had other partners as
well. some of the material covered is very relevant for cspp and it
might be worth approaching some of the organisers (perhaps eric
kluitenberg at de balie or morgan currie from inc) to see if
they are
interested in doing one of those conference reports.
http://ecommons.tuxic.nl/
best
Nate Tkacz
School of Culture and Communication
University of Melbourne
Twitter: http://twitter.com/__nate__
Research Page: http://nathanieltkacz.net
Current project: http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/cpov/about-2/
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:31 PM, Mathieu ONeil
<mathieu.oneil anu.edu.au> wrote:
[Converted from multipart/alternative]
[1 text/plain]
<!--
@page { margin: 2cm } P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm }
A:link { so-language: zxx } --> CSPP – 2010
CHRISTMAS MEMO
Hi all
After a period of quiet it is time for an update, as always
please comment on any issue.
Thanks to StefanMn's work, the website is almost finished, go
and have a look if you have not done so already
[http://cspp.oekonux.org/]. The layout is fairly minimal and
functional, it could be spruiced up later down the track but we
just wanted to get the basics right (for those who have an
account, login will enable you to see hidden categories which
will be added as we incorporate content).
Regarding our formal / official launch and call for papers. I
think a good compromise between having a traditional “issue”
release on one hand and dribbling out an article here and there
at a time on the other, would be to have at least two items for
each of our major categories (research, debate, reviews) when we
launch. Then we could add additional pairs of articles, debate,
reviews as we go along.
Following are some suggestions.
1_Research category (the only one that is peer reviewed)
1_1 Process
FWIW, here is an ultra-quick summary of the review process
which I'm copying from a message I posted yesterday to our tech-
list, I guess a version of this needs to appear at the beginning
of http://cspp.oekonux.org/journal/peer-review
[ StefanMn: we should probably explain on the cspp site how
to join the list as well as how to contact the editor ; I know
there is a contact form at the top of the page but it would be
more user-friendly to be able to send email or access the
contact form from inside the submission and peer review pages –
we can discuss this on the tech list]
a-proposal for paper proposed to email list either directly
by author or through editor
b-list gives feedback
c-full paper formally submitted to editor or posted directly
to restricted part of site (if the author has access rights)
d-editor posts paper to site if necessary, approaches three
reviewers> e-reviewers hand in reports
f-editor provides this feedback to author
g-author (accepts or rejects feedback and) re-submits full paper
h-reviewers rate this re-submission
i-author decides whether he/she is happy to publish with these
ratings> j-article is published/not published
k-reviewer reports are published/not published (pending
author/reviewers agreement)
l-if published: audience can comment; author can respond in comments
[still undecided -> we need a way to present the rating system?]
[still undecided -> we also have to determine if we publish
only as a webpage and/or as pdf?]
1_2 Submissions
-StefanMn and StefanMz's submission is ongoing, but I have
not heard from the authors as to how they wish to approach the
three reviewer's recommendations.
-Graham Seaman was interested in submitting something but has
not done so yet.
-A researcher called Jonas Andersson just finished his Ph. D
on Swedish file sharing which sounded very interesting, so I
contacted him and he has agreed to adapt one of his chapters for
the journal. I will be the editor for this one. Jonas has been
subscribed to this list (bienvenue!).
@Jonas: Please make use of this list's distributed expertise
(we have a talented and friendly board and scientific committee,
check out http://cspp.oekonux.org/journal/people) to obtain
feedback on your work.
-To develop this project initially we will have to “put our
money where our mouths are” and invest our “intellectual
capital”. A few months ago I mentioned I was intending to submit
to cspp my submission to the (non-peer reviewed) CPOV reader.
Well it turns out the CPOV editors thought my submission was not
suitable (too “general” or perhaps too critical? No matter, CPOV
people do not need to respond). In any case I am rewriting
something completely different on authority for that Reader. I
still have my original submission, “The sociology of critique in
Wikipedia” and I still want to submit it to this journal. So,
that is what I'm doing here. The only problem is this paper is
in the CPOV style (full footnotes + full bibliography) not our
chosen Harvard and I dont have time to fix it right now so I'm
using my editor *magick dust* to say that this will be fixed
later. The paper is available for download on my Australian
academic homepage:
http://adsri.anu.edu.au/people/visitors/ONeil/ONeil_Sociology%20of%20Critique_Draft.pdf> This should only be up till the end of December as a completely different text will have to replace it then.
Athina was OK to drive this paper forward as associate
editor, if she is still OK, great (it will be a nice break from
Wikileaks?)> @Athina: please let me know, if OK I will email
you privately some suggestions for reviewers and you can take it
from there.
-Anyone else who feels like contributing relevant and
original material please contact me or post a proposal to the list,
2) Debate
- The debate about ANT/Foucault, Hegelianism, and sociology
between Johan Soderberg, Nate Tkacz and me has been ready for
months (sorry for the delay Nate!). It is pretty much ready to go.
- I read some interesting posts on the P2P research list by
Martin Pedersen who was critical of some aspects of immaterial
peer production. Michel Bauwens responded quite strongly so I
thought that could be the basis for a good debate. Martin agreed
to do this, Michel will provide a basis for response, others
could jump in to and after a private email discussion we agreed
that this exchange could later be republished on the PP
foundation weblog. Martin has been subscribed to the list,
welcome aboard also!
@Martin and Michel: Debate articles are not peer reviewed so
it is up to you whether you would like to use the list to get
feedback or not.
3) Reports
- The Amsterdam CPOV report by Nate and Johana Nyesito has
been ready for months too; a few tweaks and it will be finalised
(sorry Nate and Johanna!)
- I contacted one of the organiser of the Berlin Free culture
conference in November (Leonhard Dobusch) and he has agreed to
do a report also.
I am hoping all these strands can be finalised over the next
few weeks (hmm) so as to launch formally in late January.
Any other suggestions welcome,
cheers,
Mathieu
ps. Like many of you I suppose I have been following the
efforts to shut down Wikileaks and the response of the (mainly
Western) “free Internet”. When added to the ever-spreading
Facebook identity-authentication tentacles, these control
efforts raise some serious concerns about the direction of the
network...> I agree with the conclusion of
http://cryptome.org/0003/wikileaks-six.htm which is also
reframed by http://www.hastac.org/blogs/nknouf/wikileaks-
broadcast-internet-and-importance-new-media-assemblages
Of course, apart from agreeing in principle that more
attention needs to be paid to safeguarding the physical
infrastructure, I dont have any precise or concrete ideas as to
what should be done, and I can only appeal to others'
suggestions or refer to the ongoing discussion on “alternative
email infrastructure” on the P2P foundation list...
http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/2010-December/subject.html
[2 text/html]
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal