Your panel on "Inappropriability" still does not make clear to me how the term is different from "inalienable." They seem to be the same idea. I don't understand what distinction you are trying to isolate, or why "inalienable" -- the more commonly used economic and political term -- is not the more suitable word.
For some reason you deleted the reference I added to social holon -- the Mihaela Ulieru book chapter. Was this a mistake in forking? http://www.davidbollier.fed.wiki/view/welcome-visitors/view/recent-changes/www.makecommoningwork.fed.wiki/recent-changes/view/notes-to-silke/view/social-holon/www.makecommoningwork.fed.wiki/social-holon
We need to re-visit the "Celebrate.." category sometime. Do we need to incorporate play, enlivenment and other affective characteristics into this dimension of commoning?
- -> give me some time to work on the commoning-issue; I'll report back, once the re-translation is done; I am about to add one or two more dimensions; So - once we have a new English text - let's discuss
- DB: Re "Creative Inclusiveness..." this may be our western conceit & aspiration that commons. As an empirical reality, I imagine most traditional and indigenous commons have little aspiration to be inclusive beyond their social boundaries, and indeed, perhaps a keen aversion to outsiders.
- "Inner Kernel" has replaced "Ontological Layer" -> but David wants to replace it later through sth else :-) for the moment it'll do the job
In the [Use Convivial Tools] panel, the section on the five dimensions ("Implementation....") is too succinct and elliptical to be clear. Could you expand it with another sentence or two, as needed?
I don't understand Digital Platforms and Networks -- a term that has broad application, but which is defined in very specific and narrow terms. Sounds like a discussion for the Infrastructure section.