> There is no effective method I can persue to effect this change, outside of > getting agreement from the upper power structure.
/me wonders if you really consider waiting a couple years for an election, and voting for someone else to really be an effective method of making change? And if all else fails, this is free-content. You have the right to fork, which is the typical method of effecting change in the open source world when all else has failed. (yes i know, open source/free software != free culture, but its close enough). Its even better than voting, since anyone can do it (you don't need a plurality or majority depending on voting system), and you can do it any time. No waiting for elections :) > Our Wiki environment, here and elsewhere within the sister projects does > *not* work in this manner. > Any person has a roadmap / pathway to gain power, effect changes, gain > consensus which can actually make changes, etc. Back in the early days, Wikipedia was owned by a porn company. By comparison (without being overly familiar with it), p2pu seems more open. -bawolff 2011/1/24 Wjhonson <[email protected]>: > Not made up Joe, actual. > I have an issue with something in the system. I would like to change. > That's a real issue, not made up. > There is no effective method I can persue to effect this change, outside of > getting agreement from the upper power structure. > There is no effective method by which I can gain admission to the upper > power structure. > That's a real issue Joe, not theory. > > Our Wiki environment, here and elsewhere within the sister projects does > *not* work in this manner. > Any person has a roadmap / pathway to gain power, effect changes, gain > consensus which can actually make changes, etc. > That is not a benevolent oligarchy, that is a representative democracy, or > as near as we can get to that. > Without a method by which persons can gain admission to the corridors of > power, you do not have anything close to a democracy. > That's why I oppose any involvement with P2PU. > > These are issues Joe which have actually had a direct effect in an actual > situation. Not theory. > > I have enough problems of that nature that I > > > don't need to create (or debate) made up ones. I mean, the thing is, > > > suppose it is as you say? What difference does it make to concrete > > > issues outside of political theory? > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Corneli <[email protected]> > To: Mailing list for Wikiversity <[email protected]> > Sent: Mon, Jan 24, 2011 1:36 pm > Subject: Re: [Wikiversity-l] what is wikiversity for? (Re: US gov't awards > $2B in edu.... > >> I certainly was not aware of, nor made aware of, any place or system >> within > > >> P2PU where a person could actually cite policy to enact changes. > > > > > > It's true that they are not particularly driven by policy, and don't > > > have a particularly clear roadmap (which I think is more a historical > > > fluke than anything), and so don't have a policy for changing the > > > roadmap. My personal hope is to help get the roadmap in order, but I > > > hope that change in that institution is always going to be about what > > > people *do* and not about policy. > > > > > >> If the meaning and nature of "rough consensus" and the specific issue, is > > >> determined by the existing power structure, and that power structure is >> not > > >> available to be modified, than what you have really is a oligarchic > > >> benevolence government. > > > > > > I don't reify power structures in the way you appear to do. I prefer > > > to think about things like "what wiki does the organisation use, and > > > what features does that wiki have?" If I don't like something, I > > > either look for a solution or else put up with the problem until I'm > > > totally sick of it. I have enough problems of that nature that I > > > don't need to create (or debate) made up ones. I mean, the thing is, > > > suppose it is as you say? What difference does it make to concrete > > > issues outside of political theory? > > > > > >> This isn't ancient Greece, and any system of "We'll listen to > > >> you as long as we like to but we're not under any requirement to do >> anything > > >> the public wants" isn't an open governance system. > > > > > > I can't see any more clear illustration of the difference between > > > governance and government. At P2PU, there is no transcendent or royal > > > "we" that has the power to do, or to not do, what "the public" wants. > > > It's true that there is a division between those who have the power to > > > write checks and those who don't have that power, but that doesn't > > > mean that the non-check-writers lack other forms of power. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Wikiversity-l mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikiversity-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l > > _______________________________________________ Wikiversity-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l
