Notes to David

new notes - October 2017

- see additional notes in Neustart Schweiz

- pls have a look at my question on CleBer Oggun (red highlight) DB: I'm not sure what your question is. - I deleted the "Metaphors: if possible quote" in the template, because if I find compelling metaphors, I put them directly into the Metaphors for the Commons -> but still, it's an intriguing question to ask. DB: Fine. - I've added your power-related question to the site on power where I already started to move towards a "power theory in a commons" Pls. have a look fedwiki - remember: Don't edit the Alphabetical Listing of projects, doesn't make sense if we both do it, I'll try to keep it up to date; drop me a note if sth. is missing DB: OK. - I've added text to the main site "make commoning work" two intro lines at the beginning of the sections and an explanation of the alphabetical listing, were I added the criteria we spoke about in Boston DB: OK. - Is the "inevitability of hybrid commons structures & motivations now clear to you or do we need to discuss this further? DB: I've always accepted this idea. Not sure what we need to discuss except HOW hybrids straddle market & commons successfully. - discuss the problematic SELF as in century of the self in self-governance; and if we want to stick to the term governance -> which, as you say might be problematic; perhaps coordination? - not strong enough? Self-rule (the "self" again ...) DB: We've done this. Delete this entry? - I've added plenty of stuff on "innovation" and try to come up with a commons related "innovative" replacement for this word: what about CREOVATION? or transformation for the commons? (because it's an endless process of transformation) DB: Discussed but unresolved. Delete here? Discuss further? - my interviews revealed that the dimension "creatively adaptive" is not clear enough Hmm. Another case of us "imposing" our theoretical language, as in "convivial tools." Not sure if this invalidates the term or not. - I opened a site (btw. what we've called panel is in fact called a "site") for Pragmatic Imagination if you have the book (do you?) you can add the core ideas there. I find the term highly intriguing. Sounds like patterns theory to me. But I am reluctant to buy an expensive book in English. -->when reading this I realized that the epistemological process we go through in the commons could be framed as "abductive reasoning" wiki DB: I'll send you a ppt by one of the coauthors of this book. Some interesting stuff, but also a bit hyper-theoretical. Notes to David

older notes, still unanswered

- nice question: "Do you like your desires?" DB: Not sure what the relevance is here -- Inner Kernel? Limits of individual autonomy when we are inscribed within a mysterious cosmos?

- pls note: it's important how a panel begins. This will be displayed whenever someone forks. DB: Agreed. Delete this item.

- have a look at the Charters / wikihouse principles, they are great. I still need to assess the language these charters give us, but it's awsome to see how some of them are to the point, I will continue collecting. DB: Looks good. Let's delete this note.

- Re the Formatting: pls make sure the titles of the books and essays are correct + add the year of publication; editing the "Sources" is a bit boring; also: I think we should do the formatting of the sources in Markdown, so that we automatically create a new line for each entry without creating a new paragraph, see f.e. my reformatting of sources in Produce Cosmo-Locally DB: I disagree. It's harder to identify separate entries if there is not a line-space between them. Everything just runs together.

- PLEASE USE THE QUOTE-FUNCTION IF YOU QUOTE - open from the factory with html and type <blockquote> before you start the sentence, no need to close unless you continue in the same paragraph. if you do so you close with </blockquote> DB: Agreed. We can delete this item. (But I still think that we are over-using blockquotes for sometimes-ordinary quotes.)

- instead of "website" -> "html" or "wiki" or "fedwiki" or "pdf", i.e. the type of document DB: Agreed. Delete this item.

- I've added the thesis that self-reflection is a condition for commoning - what do you think? Do you remember that wonderful question for a woman during your talk at the American Academy in Berlin? "What does it requiere to be commonable?" DB: Agreed. Now used in "Reflection on Peer Governance," so I guess this is resolved.

- I guess we should establish a responsability for the alphabetical listing - it's less work of only one person works on it and easier to keep an overview DB: Agreed --YOU will be the custodian of the Alphabetical listings. We will need to do a "global re-reading" of the case studies at some point for completeness and stylistic consistency. Later.

- I was just looking - via our framework - not via the search function or the recent changes - for the charter section and found it - obviously - in "constituting tools. But this also belongs to commoning and governance, to the whole "shared purpose and values" issue. What I realize is, that if we make the inter-linkages, we really can start putting it all together.; so, I'll try to care more for the interlinkages DB: This is an obsolete note. We can delete it.

Provisioning through commons Panel

General comments on all panels about dimensions of provisioning:

I 've deleted the 'Rely on Distributed Structures' from the provisioning section, because it belongs to governance, this is an insight from my interviews and I wonder why we didn't come up with this before

we should start with a short description of what we mean be the principle and THEN add an "picture this and that situation" --> this gets us down to Earth and in the writing mode! Add an image then a more detailed explanation of the meaning then a list of examples I've tried to do this with Pool & Share have a look. what are cooperative bylaws?

Cap & Share or Mutualize is new, but at some point I still wanna include REDD + need to discuss the characteristica as opposed to Cap & Trade

DB: REDD is the perfect example for why one should cap & share but not trade -- because trade & market exchange severs a commitment to intrinsic value and use value, and thus to preservation of the resource & community.


I wonder if there is a dimension missing in the Provisioning section which adresses the "what for" question: I.e. if production is needs based: here is a quote from Fed Wiki "Our work evolves with the communities of purpose who have need of and are served by our work to date. We look for implementations that open up more possibilities rather than bringing development to completion."

- FOR LATER on the topic of POSSESSION OVER PROPERTY, which still needs to be explained; I was wondering: is "possession" a "customary social practice", or is it "modern law". I guess both - it's our daily experience - f.i. when we rent a flat or sit on a public bench. DB: Possession is a customary social practice, but "modern law" does not usually recognize & enforce it. (There is a bitter saying, "Possession is nine-tenths of the law," meaning he who possesses nearly owns something as a de facto matter.) SH: oh, that's interesting. Will reflect upon when trying to write down a short explanation. Here is a thing: We might go back to roman law, because possession in US law might be different from Besitz (= possession) in German law

- I changed the Use Convivial Tools panel and left a few points for discussion at the end

Governance of Commons

comments abt Governance of Commons - SH-> kept all examples in a specific governance panel; where we would need a short intro ( btw: What do we understand by governance if we ask at the same time: who needs a government? - Why would this be a governance principle?: Co-operatives with representative voting for management and board DB: Because it is a widely used structure among cooperatives. Would co-ops with such governance therefore NOT be commons? I'm not claiming this is progressive, but it IS a common reality (as are tribal forms of commoning). PHONE: "COMMON REALITY" vs "COMMONS" ( "Organizational Form" vs. Commons - but of course, cooperatives can also be understood as philosophies SH: co-operatives, at least in Germany, are organizational forms of working for the market or working for the commons, in fact: the organizational form itself doesn#t really matter. We even have "shareholder enterprises" which are more "commonistic" than co-operatives - DB: it seems that isolated tribes with limited state or market contact ARE a widespread and distinct form of commons. And its governance, accordingly, is more distinct from most western and non-traditional models that we may cite. DISCUSS: WHICH EXAMPLES TO QUOTE IN GENERAL?

We need to redo the general Provisioning through commons panel, one's we've done the dimensions

State Functions for Commoning

Deferred to Later: See Subpanel Discussion State Functions for Commoning


- former discussion points: Governing market-commons interaction, Where to place ENLIVENING?, What does ontological absolute mean? - find notes for you at socialization tools SEE MY RESPONSE ON THAT PAGE.

about style sheet

I am not sure I can do all this as I can hardly do it in my own language (ortho-problems); and I don't know the difference btw English English and American English