Permaculture Information Web

["Lawrence F. London, Jr." <lfl AT intrex.net>]

Stephanie Gerson wrote:

> Bear and I presented PIW to the small audience, and received wonderful 
> feedback.  While describing the project, I 'zoomed out' and noted that 
> although what we are constructing is specific to ecological relationships 
> (at this point), we will hopefully provide a useful model/tool for web-
> making of any kind - whether it be social webs, financial webs, or 
> otherwise.  This definitely struck a cord with these networkers, as they 
> immediately noted its potential usefulness for their purposes.  One 
> member of the audience humorously noted that each plant in the web could 
> just as easily be replaced with a non-profit...

Or for for-profit enterprises, i.e. small farms within a local food 
production network;
or small diversified farms within a local and regional marketing network 
supplying
basic homeowner products: food, crafts, tools, furniture, pottery, textiles, 
etc etc.

> Which has been my secret wish from the very beginning.  (Or not so 
> secret?  Can't remember now if I stuck that in the vision statement...)  
> Anyways.  It's happening.  The paradigm shift from reductionism to 
> holism.  The turning point.  Apocalypse.  Whatever you want to call it.  
> And we need tools with which to understand and design systems.  Web-
> making tools.    

> Prior to the meeting, I'd mentioned to Bear how hard it is for me to 
> write letters of inquiry.  They expect me to write our intention in only 
> one page?  How can I possibly explain Permaculture, the importance of 
> ecological relationships, let alone talk about how we fit into this 

> paradigm shift...all in one page!  But after Thursday, Bear mentioned the 
> possibility of making this web-making-authoring-tool intention explicit 
> in our grant proposals.  Maybe?  Don't want to throw us off track - of 

Do it.

Plan ahead for the long term future of PIW. More fun this way.

> course we must focus on our particular subject matter for now, and it is 
> one of fundamental importance.

> However, what we are creating will inevitably be applicable to other 
> subject matters!  And, as Bear said, perhaps we shouldn't hardcode the 
> subject matter into this - instead, make it modular, adaptable to 
> creating/visualizing other kinds of webs, such as webs of non-profits (as 
> the fellow in the audience suggested).  

Can't sacrifice adaptability for robustness, not that this would happen, but 
to just
avoid that pitfall when envisioning PIW as a multi[purpose tool,
web-creating authoring tool for cyberspace.

> This may seem somewhat tangential to Andy's message.  But not at all.  We 
> must insert PIW into the existing landscape of informational resources 
> the same way you would insert a plant into an emerging guild.  And 
> looking at the larger existing landscape - that of initiatives to create 
> webs of something, anything - we could insert PIW into this larger 
> landscape quite fruitfully.  Plus, this would be a nice meta-level goal 
> to include in grant proposals, and would help tie everything together in 
> those painfully short letters of inquiry.

Good idea.
--
L.F.London
lfl AT intrex.net
http://market-farming.com
http://www.ibiblio.org/ecolandtech