Comments on: Person over Peer https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/person-over-pee/2012/09/07 Researching, documenting and promoting peer to peer practices Fri, 07 Sep 2012 16:30:40 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.5.15 By: Tiberius https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/person-over-pee/2012/09/07/comment-page-1#comment-492973 Fri, 07 Sep 2012 16:30:40 +0000 http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/?p=26262#comment-492973 Right on Sam! I can see that within http://www.SENSORICA.co and I am constantly working on establishing a culture. People who engage in p2p need to understand the p2p game. If they don’t, they can upset the p2p ecosystem. I can’t describe all the complexity in this post, but I can identify a few important issues.
# For example, people need to have a natural tendency to share, and be transparent. In more concrete terms, to use online collaborative tools like Google docs, or Hackpads and not to be territorial, to invite others to co-edit and/or provide feedback, while respecting some basic rules. But this comes with other issues attached to it: to go over the need to control, to surpass the fear of being criticized or the fear of becoming replaceable,…
# Another example is to be able to accept difference, to be inclusive. It takes some special skills and a special attitude NOT to say no to propositions that don’t fit your model, or to exclude a person who doesn’t please you. #occupy was the best thing that happen to me, because it thought me exactly that, to be inclusive, but not in a stupid, way. Being inclusive requires some patience and moderation sometimes…
# Learn to deal with complexity. p2p systems are NOT simple systems, but a lot of good things can come out of them, and sometimes even surprise us. This is not just saying “let it go and good things will emerge”. There is an art behind managing complexity, guiding it towards positive outcomes. Most of us don’t have it…
# Here’s another one that I find important and I am fighting hard to have people integrate it: THINK LARGE SCALE. People are used to think small, within their immediate environment. We need to realize that some p2p games are very large-scale, and can ONLY become stable, creative, productive, i.e. can only exist at large scale. Wikipedia cannot function at small scale, content would become unstable. Some p2p systems have a threshold critical mass, above which they become statistically stabilized. These systems rely on large scale effects. Players in these systems need to think large scale. Small social dynamics is different than large-scale social dynamics. the effects of our actions within small settings are different than in large settings, when our actions can easily propagate to the entire network. I have A LOT of problems with this issue, making people think large scale, while acting small AND large scale.

That’s the time I have for this… Thank you Sam for stimulating this reflection!

]]> By: Michel Bauwens https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/person-over-pee/2012/09/07/comment-page-1#comment-492971 Fri, 07 Sep 2012 04:40:46 +0000 http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/?p=26262#comment-492971 Peer to Peer systems do not assume that people are peers in the sense of all of them being equally good, but actually as persons who all have “something” to contribute , i.e. they are based on the principle of Equipotentiality. (http://p2pfoundation.net/Equipotentiality). P2P social systems are motivation agnostic (they do not rely exclusively on altruism) and consciously align, through their design individual interest and motivations, and the collective interest, i.e. the object of the group’s cooperation. P2P systems are integratively interested both in developing persons, and in developing the capacities of groups. But of course, it is much more difficult to directly work on the ‘betterment’ of participating individuals, on the growth of their capabilities, education, spirituality, including the capacity for cooperation. Ideally, P2P systems should include both subjective and objective systems, for both individuals and groups.

]]>