Message 05731 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: oxenT05727 Message: 3/11 L2 [In index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [ox-en] Website (was: Politics and Oekonux)

People, especially those with inclination and bias toward
participatory, peer to peer practices, want participation in drafting
the message, not a theory to be handed to them.

On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 1:17 AM, Mathieu O'Neil
<mathieu.oneil> wrote:
[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
Hi Stefan

From my perspective, the purpose would be to broaden the number of people who are interested and (even more so) active in peer production. I think this would be aided by the development of coherent theories. So I dont see these goals as incompatible, as long as the theory-building does not prevent the diffusion of the message.

Re. audience, that is a really good point. I was thinking about that very point. There are obviously really different groups. I think we can safely say that theorists of peer production would be aware of peer production. Riffing on what you said before, I would distinguish:
- people who like P2P music etc (pirate party voters)
- hackers, engineers who are not political
- left political people who have never heard of peer production (believe me, there are still a lot)
- politicians, social movement people, etc etc

Should we tailor a different message for each constituency? I don't think so. If the message is coherent, explains the capitalist world and how peer production is affecting the world (including being recuperated / coopted to sell other stuff, lets not be blind) and gives practical ideas about extending peer production, then all of the above should find something to connect to. If the message is appealing, and presented in a good way, it will find an audience. What we have to be careful about is relying too heavily on jargon, catchphrases, excommunications, all the usual groupuscule stuff where allies end up tearing each other apart over proper definitions. Also we should try to remember that people have lives, kids who they want to succeed or at least not have a worse life than them, parents to look after...

----- Original Message -----
From: Stefan Meretz <stefan>
Date: Tuesday, May 12, 2009 6:55 am
Subject: [ox-en] Website (was: Politics and Oekonux)
To: list-en

Hi Mathieu and all,

I started a new thread (for those using threaded views in their
clients), leaving your post regarding a new ox website below.

I am interested in having a better ox website.

Before starting with the question of purpose I like to ask what
the main
goal of an oekonux website is and who is to be addressed. If
goal and
target group is clear, then purpose or functions of a website
can be
better discussed IMHO.

I am sure, that goal and target group are far from being evident.

Goal, is it to
- inform about peer production?
- foster debates around pp?
- collect theories of pp?
- campaining for more members?
- influence politics?
- evaluate new developments?
- doing research on questions around pp?
- develop an "oekonux theory"?

Target Group, is it
- general audience?
- activists of free/open peer projects?
- theorists of peer production?
- people being interested in emancipatory movements?
- politicians?
- other movements?

These are only ideas hopefully provoking your ideas. I don't
know, if
this can work in a mailinglist discussion.

If the questions about goal and target group are more or less
then it is easier to look at the following aspects like purpose,
functions, content, technical tools, design, access etc.

StefanMn already wrote down some technical aspects:

And below we have Mathieu's ideas about content and purpose.


On 2009-05-11 15:55, Mathieu O'Neil wrote:
What purpose should the website have?

- Should it be an archive of texts (like now)? In my view there
should of course be an archival section, but as Franz argued a while
back it should not be a comprehensive archive, this already exists

- Should it be a site for spirited discussion between highly
involved> people about the merits of this or that aspect of P2P
economics (or
whatever you want to call it)? No, this is the function of the
mailing list.

I think the website should have these main functions:

(a) it should articulate clearly how peer production is a germ form
for a society without exchange - short texts, slogans, etc

(b) it should have some longer theories to back up (a): this already

(c) it should provide concrete examples of how peer production is
working now (free software and hardware)

(d) it should provide concrete examples of how peer production might
be applied to other sectors. This is a key point. What can be
done to
extend peer production?

(e) finally, it should offer some means of dialogue between
the ox
community and others


(a) These definitions should be written collaboratively by whoever
wants to lend a hand and then submitted to the list within a
reasonable time frame so that the process does not drag on forever

(b) at this stage it is not cost-effective to redo everything
so I am
thinking we can have links to the old website for particularly
interesting texts

(c) pretty obvious, no need to dwell on it – a page of links
would do

(d) I think there needs to be a focused effort by the
community to
come up with short, sharp summaries of how peer production can start
being applied right now to new areas. For example, there has
been a
discussion on p2p and ox lists about education. But without going
into details about how this would work in a future where everything
is free, how could peer production be used _right now_ in the
education sector?

(e) interactivity will help to attract people.  What I an
suggesting> is that people with a strong interest in peer
production (basically
anyone on the lists, though obviously people like Christian and
Michel for example (who have big websites) or Smari or
whomever would
agree to debate all comers on an open wiki. This could be restricted
to certain days (once or twice a week) during a month. We would
"advertise" this widely over the net – Oekonux monthly / ?
/quarterly> dialogues or whatever. We could publish a summary
after each one.

I am happy to help coordinate within reason but (a) (d) and
(e) rely
on community input. If no-one speaks up, I will let it slide – its
not like I don’t have enough to do already…

Start here:

Contact: projekt

Dr Mathieu O'Neil
Adjunct Research Fellow
Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute
College of Arts and Social Science
The Australian National University

E-mail: mathieu.oneil
Tel.: (61 02) 61 25 38 00
Mail: Coombs Building, 9
Canberra, ACT 0200 - AUSTRALIA

[2 text/html]
Contact: projekt


Marc Fawzi
Contact: projekt

Thread: oxenT05727 Message: 3/11 L2 [In index]
Message 05731 [Homepage] [Navigation]