P2P Foundation

Researching, documenting and promoting peer to peer practices


    Admin

    P2P Foundation Sites/Publications

    Worth Reading

    Introductory Essay
    Extensive Essay

    Sponsors

    Interviews

    Video

    - New P2P Video at Pixelace, Helsinki, March 2009

    Podcasts

    - Interview at Open Views by Sundar Raman, 9th March 2007
    - Interview with Richard Poynder

    Resources

    Delicious P2P tags
    P2P Blog Aggregator
    P2P Encyclopedia
    P2P Foundation Wiki
    P2P Meme Map
    P2P Movements
    P2P Podcasts
    P2P Tools
    P2P Topical Index
    P2P Webcasts
    givegetnation

    Visit our archive

  • Books


    Free Software, Free Society

    Community

    Join the P2P Community on Frappr frappr link to our community

    Want to advertise? Click here.

  • Subscribe



  • Donate

    If you value the insight and content of this site, gift us with a contribution.

  • Communities and Networks Connection
  • Recent Comments:

    • rachel: well its true that kens work is great, and some of these critics are downright...
    • Michel Bauwens: This contribution from Jeff Vail, sent by email, is not directly...
    • Michel Bauwens: Commentary by Eric Hunting, via email: Apple has, ironically, always...
    • Michel Bauwens: Feel free to post it as a comment, and we can upgrade it to an article,...
    • laws and liberty: Lol, I wouldn’t have said that personally, but this is a very...

  • Authors

  • Process Network building theory - P2P Foundation

    photo of Sam Rose

    Sam Rose
    26th September 2007


    Process Network building theory - P2P Foundation
    Diagram

    Stage 1: Discussion/Credibility establishment

    Assuming the two groups decide they want to connect at all: The process starts out with discussion/conversation among the two groups. This is where the two groups both start to create shared understanding through dialogue, and mutually determine the level of credibility and knowledge of one another. This process is transparent, in order to encourage equitable interaction. Stage 1 could be:

    * Conversation/reasoned discussion and debate
    * Mutual peer review of each groups self-selected “highest insights” Peer review could be done through a semantic annotation process, that would semantically “tag” both an ontology, and a “rating/review” onto content (which would then make an RDF-exportable knowledge network map, that could be filtered and sorted via machine, based on peer-review, and/or ontology)
    * Summary of conversation into Pattern language http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?PatternLanguage wiki pages, that help create mutual understanding

    The groups can then stabilize into a conversation based relationship, which has value based mostly around feedback and loose connection. Or, the groups could decide to establish a “process network”, and collaborate together, to leverage the power of their numbers. if so, they move on to stage 2

    Stage 2 Evaluate and Orchestrate

    They mutually evaluate one another’s capability to accomplish the proposed work, and they decide which group will fill what role based on the capability assessment. Then they select individuals to act as “orchestrators” to help coordinate, and to make sure that reciprocation of value is reaching participants satisfactorily.

    The “middle ground” that I proposed to create on Semantic wiki was to help facilitate stage 1.

    Tools and Techniques

    Examples of people summarizing discussion into wiki pages

    This concept actually emerged from the first wiki. If you read the page of the inventor of wiki http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?WardCunningham you’ll see his description of how he goes about doing this. You can also see this in http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl? and http://communitywiki.org

    All of those wikis are “CommunityOverContent” wikis, which means there is some very cutting edge thinking and discussion going on, but the purpose of the wiki is for a group of close collaborators to create a PatternLanguage, as opposed to creating pages for a publication. Readability is less important than evolution of mutual understanding, in those wikis.

    When Wikipedia was founded, and when Media Wiki software was created, the purpose of the wiki in that case was ContentOverCommunity, the community was dedicated to content. So, the discussion was moved off of the content page, and to a talk page, and the content pages in Wikipedia were organized for maximum readability.

    Most communities that use wiki are usually some degree of a hybrid of these two purposes. So, MediaWiki becomes a great tool for them to both try to develop a PatternLanguage (as you see happening at http://c2.com/cgi/wiki? and http://www.usemod.com/cgi-bin/mb.pl?), and trying to develop good quality readable content, like a Wikipedia-type encyclopedia site. P2P foundation falls under this category.

    Sometimes, though, two groups that are trying to collaborate, when they are in “stage 1″ of the process described above, can use more of an open CommunityOverConent space, because it is more important to try and create a PatternLanguage at that stage (Shared understanding), and to build trust (through Shared Understanding, and through mutual equitable evaluation/review of existing knowledge bases). Stage 2 is when they will be able to join forces on the creation of refined content.

    References

    The Only Sustainable Edge John Hagel, JS Brown - Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing, 2005

    Retrieved from “http://p2pfoundation.net/Process_Network_building_theory”

    Leave a Reply

    XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>