RE: [jox] New Draft CFP
- From: "Mathieu O'Neil" <mathieu.oneil anu.edu.au>
- Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2009 13:11:41 +1000
HI STEFAN, ALL
NOT SHOUTING - BRIEF REPLIES IN CAPS WHERE REQUIRED.
Hi Mathieu and all!
I agree with everything I don't comment :-) .
Last week (11 days ago) Mathieu O'Neil wrote:
b) Regarding topics of interest:
@StefanMn:
- "Critical theory" - yes in the sense of Marx (but also Horkheimer,
Marcuse etc.)
Yes, yes, yes :-) ! In particular I'd love to see the work of Marcuse
to be connected to peer production!
CHECK OUT CHRISTIAN FUCHS' RESEARCH.
BTW: I think this clear statement clarifies many concerns about the
direction of the journal :-) .
WELL, I ALSO UNDERSTAND IN A BROADER SENSE - AS IN "ENVISIONING RESEARCH NOT
JUST IN TERMS OF THE ACTUAL BUT ALSO THE POSSIBLE" - A CONCERN FOR SOCIAL
JUSTICE, AGAINST SOCIAL DOMINATION... DOES NOT HAVE TO BE MARX / FRANKFURT
SCHOOL EVEN IF THOSE APPROACHES ARE USEFUL.
- peer production and expertise: I mean the different relationships to
specialised knowledge in peer projects (Wikipedia vs. Free Software for
example) and the relationship to traditional holders of learned authority
(academia, media, government experts etc)
I understood expertise as a special ability not everyone has. In fact
it is quite interesting that in contemporary examples of peer
production special abilities are often needed - i.e. expertise. If I
get your right then your point is more some sort of title? That is
indeed rather uncommon to be very useful in peer production. May be we
could be more precise here but may be it is only my lack of English
showing through here.
NO, I WAS REFERRING TO HOW SOME PROJECTS ARE OPEN TO ALL WHEREAS OTHERS
REQUIRE SPECIAL EXPERTISE, OR HOW THERE CAN BE INEQUALITY IN OPEN PROJECTS
BECAUSE OF IMBALANCE IN EXPERTISE / TECHNICAL COMPETENCE BETWEEN
PARTICIPANTS.
- Maybe "future of peer production" and "expansion of peer production"
overlap a bit? Could we keep one - say the latter?
Fine with me.
OK
- In addition: I took out "forms and function" as this was already in the
mission statement in the first para. And I added feminism and growth.
Feminism and growth are both particular capitalist topics - though the
value sets attached may be more general. Again I suggest to be more
general here. Something like "peer production and capitalist moral" or
so. On the other hand I think feminism is covered already by "peer
production and social movements".
I DISAGREE THAT GROWTH IS WITHIN CAPITALISM - SOME PEOPLE WOULD ARGUE THAT
HAVING AN INDUSTRIAL SYSTEM OF GROWTH IS A MORE SERIOUS PROBLEM THAN HAVING
A CAPITALIST SYSTEM AS EVERYONE WANTS IT (EVEN ANTI-CAPITALISTS) AND IT IS
DESTROYING THE PLANET AND RENDERING EVERYONE DEPENDENT ON TECHNICIANS AND
THE TECHNICAL SYSTEM..
AS FOR FEMINISM IT IS NOT USUALLY CONSIDERED A "SOCIAL MOVEMENT" ANY MORE. I
HAVE SOME VAGUE AWARENESS OF YOUR POINT OF HOW IS USED IN CAPITALISM BUT
FRANKLY THE SITUATION OF WOMEN WORLDWIDE IS SO BAD STILL THAT IT IS A MOOT
POINT IN MY VIEW. WE HAVE TO BE CLEAR WHERE WE STAND ON THIS: FOR EQUALITY
BETWEEN GENDERS, THAT IS WHY I PUT IT.
e) Regarding the "publisher"
I just wanted to acknowledge the fact that the journal is connected to /
emerging from [ox]. At a minimum the journal is hosted on the [ox] servers
and maintained by [ox]. And I think it is very proper that such a journal
should be hosted by a non-profit organization. So I suggest that we just use
that word, hosted.
"Hosted" is indeed great :-) .
OK!
That's all I can think of. Please find the revised CFP below. When we have
finalised the following I would like to send this out (though the list
archive bug would need to be resolved as well). Would it be appropriate to
have a deadline?
AFAICS the discussion is still fruitful. Insofar I'd not stop it now
but wait until no comments are coming any more. For *this* a deadline
may be useful, however.
ALL RIGHT - END OF THIS MONTH? OR LATER? 15 SEPTEMBER?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=
[CSPP uses an electronic system for submissions... Maybe leave this out
for now?]
Yes. We need to check this out technically before filling in.
Nonetheless we need to create some option to submit things.
OK.
Scientific Committee [Editorial Board?]:
I'd prefer "editorial board" - in particular because some or even most
members of the editorial board do not really have academic merits in
this particular field.
OK.
CHEERS
MATHIEU
Grüße
Stefan
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal