[cc-community] [iCommonslab] The iCommons Lab Report
d.berry at sussex.ac.uk
Thu Nov 9 12:39:14 EST 2006
You make interesting points, however:
> Ubuntu has built a functional global community of peer producers which
> includes thousands of participants and a reasonably functional
> self-governance system.
What exactly is a 'reasonably functional self-governance system'?
> Frankly, CC has not done that, nor, to the
> best of my knowledge, have any sociologists, political theorists, or
> political scientists.*
Then you will realise the sociologists, political theorists and
political scientists have each in their own way contributed to the
project of understanding, explaining and attempting to improve the
government of our societies. There is quite a lot of useful
theoretical, empirical and practical work that these disciplines have
worked to produce which we should draw on.
> Is it perfect? No. Is it well informed by over
> a decade of experience in building functional communities which
> combine the feedback of thousands of people with sometimes very
> diverse goals ? Absolutely.
Yes, it is very interesting. But it is not democracy and does not
require legitimacy. It is a technical project with a clearly defined
goal and easy way of monitoring it. I can't see how that can be a way
of understanding or explaining how iCommons - with its claims of a
global creative commons or whatever - can function. But then the
question I am asking is whether the iCommons has more in common with
a technical/business project than a project with a democratic mandate.
> So I'd not be so quick to dismiss what they've done just because of
> who they are; if anything, they have a lot more relevant applied
> practice than the groups you'd have us look to.
Applied practice of producing computer code. Not creating legitimacy.
Running code - remember.
More information about the cc-community