On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Michel Bauwens <[email protected]> wrote: > Just to remind you, what we have at the P2P Foundation is a series of > 'hoses' or pipes, that are underutilized at this stage, > > Combining the right wiki categories, blog archive sections, and combined > delicious tag on the same subject domain would create at least a dozen > selective 'best of' pointers of the main trends and activities in that > subject domain. For me, this would be a first step, the raw material. (we > can of course add similar best of selections). >
I like this iterative/collaborative set of processes. We have a similar process in http://socialsynergyweb.org/culturing/ and general social bookmarking (we are refining this now as we transition from Social Synergy to Forward Foundation). Yet, we also are deliberately going to be reviewing and rigorously summarizing key literature on cooperation commons subjects, and other subjects, as Forward Foundation. This will be part of our futures/foresight and systems analysis work. So, at least for us, we'll continue to actually contribute to summaries at http://cooperationcommons.com/summaries on a monthly basis starting in January (we'll have an archive or summaries, may of which will fit into the CoCo container as they'll be related to cooperation studies). But, beyond that, beyond carrying forward the work of cooperation commons, there are ways in general that all of us can coordinate on pooling knowledge, and collaborating on projects (example http://wiki.openkollab.com/wagn/Pooled_Fund_Project ) > As a transition step, we could have some collective choice system, a la > digg, which allows important items to bubble up .. > Do you already have this system. Also sounds in some ways similar to what we are doing with http://socialsynergyweb.org/culturing/, although we are not "digging" or rating objects up or down, but we could be. > Then, on the basis of those channels, we could create some added value > synthesis, resulting in period reports for clients or the market .. > I was also looking at pursuing ways to find ongoing funding for this activity. Even without funding, there is lots that we are all already doing that could be synthesized and released for instance quarterly. this could be a joint effort, carry all 3 (or four if you include cooperation commons) names. I think it could be important to show all entities to convey that it is very possible for people to create network processes like this. > Is this off base, or also what some people have in mind, more or less? > I think this gives some pathways for collaboration. I hope that Rick Adler, Paul Hartzog and others will read and consider, and respond to this :-D >Michel -- -- Sam Rose Social Synergy Tel:+1(517) 639-1552 Cel: +1-(517)-974-6451 skype: samuelrose email: [email protected] http://socialsynergyweb.com http://forwardfound.org http://socialsynergyweb.org/culturing http://flowsbook.panarchy.com/ http://socialmediaclassroom.com http://localfoodsystems.org http://notanemployee.net http://communitywiki.org "The universe is not required to be in perfect harmony with human ambition." - Carl Sagan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CooperationCommons" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cooperationcommons?hl=en.
