Message 00457 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00448 Message: 7/44 L6 [In date index] [In thread index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

Re: [jox] Chaos or transparency?

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
I think this is an excellent suggestion,

I personally would support 3 thematic and one 'free'  issue per year ...

On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Wittel, Andreas

[Converted from multipart/mixed]

[1 text/plain]
I agree with Michel's comment on process. As this is a new experiment for a
journal I don't think it is possible anyway to get the process right
immediately. This will be much about trial and error. We will have to see
what works and what does not, and remain open and ready to make changes with
respect to process as we go along.

with respect to content: I wonder if it would make sense to start with a
special issue, that is with a concrete theme for the first issue. What we
have contentwise so far is the name of the journal and otherwise a huge
blank canvas ready to be filled somehow. I wonder if it would make it easier
to submit stuff initially if we focus on some things and themes.



From: owner-journal on behalf of Michel Bauwens
Sent: Tue 25/01/2011 02:13
To: journal
Subject: Re: [jox] Chaos or transparency?

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
I disappeared very early on from this project because I could sense it
be a very process-heavy project ... which is fine by me as long as I don't
have to be involved

what I think is important is to combine two things: 1) continue to improve
as you go along,

but even more important in my opinion is 2) to be content focused: get
articles out  there to the public, and start publicising them and debating
the ideas,

I hope this project can reach this stage sooner rather than later, and once
there, I'll do my best to spread the word both about the project and the
content in it,

but please after 18 months (or is it 2 years already?) of preparation,
get the dialogue going around the issues and the research,

I hope this doesn't sound smug, it's not meant to be and I realize the very
hard work by stefan, mathieu and others, but it's time to open the windows
and look outside


On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 8:20 AM, nathaniel tkacz

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
Well said Athina.

Nate Tkacz

School of Culture and Communication
University of Melbourne


Research Page: <>

Current project:

On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 12:05 PM, Athina Karatzogianni

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
Hi Mathieu, Stefan and everyone

Reading this exchange I am wondering whether we can have a new
here, a sort of blank sheet and restart by taking on board only what
been achieved so far, without any other useless baggage.

A review process has been more or less sketched out, and it is clear
feasible at this point what this is, it has been debated for over 30
emails. We have reviewed some papers and have sent some papers for
this is ongoing and soon we can have an inaugural issue perhaps.We have
editorial board, a scientific committee and a functioning site we can
point people to what the journal is about and discover more things to
utilise the site for; perhaps Stefan can oblige us by introducing us to
they are, so we can all use them.

For an effort which started back in March in Hull and is mostly done
email, with a lot of transparent dialogue in a very public way, I d say
these are considerable accomplishments.

I would also like to say that we have all contributed a tiny bit to
effort, and Stefan and Mathieu most of all, and thank you loads for
would now be a shame to start throwing the toys out of the pram because
are getting tired of the seemingly long and tiresome admin usually
in this type of projects.

I think it is about offering a new platform, a collaborative project we
all build together, so it is not about who is chaotic and who is
or who is to blame for this and that, this is not a capitalist
and no one should be worried about getting it wrong really, as no one
getting fired. Lets try and get along and see how we can make this work
well as possible, given that it is our own time we are spending doing
something we like.

Lastly, perhaps it would help if we can get on some kind of
like skype, "rebond" and rekindle our vision on what this journal could
should be about for everyone involved.

It's 1 am here so excuse the sentimentality.....



On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:04 PM, Mathieu ONeil <

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
Hi Stefan

I think some of this is attributable to our very different
and styles - you are very thorough and I am very impatient - and
consequently to how we approach projects: you probably think
should be documented in great detail, I am happy with what works and
certainly don't have the same experience than you with software
when you do a magazine or journal (I've done several) you don't need
document everything in great detail; you just want to publish

So upon reflection I agree that solely relying on the list to
process is not optimal. I will try to use the site more. Though to be
honest, I sometimes find it hard to navigate. What may seem perfectly
obvious and easy for you is not perceived in the same way by

----- Original Message -----
From: Stefan Merten <smerten>
Date: Monday, January 24, 2011 6:59 pm
Subject: [jox] Chaos or transparency?
To: journal

Hi project!

From all I saw so far from Mathieu he really prefers chaos. Or
do you
have an up-to-date overview over all the submissions and their

Yes, that would be my last two emails on the topic...

What we actually have is a mail by Mathieu once in a while where he
says what he currently thinks the state of things is. And it
feels to
me that he changes his mind every week.

This is interesting to say the least. Is there any evidence to back

Well, I learned that transparency is not only necessary for
but even more so for peer production projects (like I thought
this one
should be an instance of). Therefore at least to me it is
crucial to change the situation.

I tried to built the web site so it allows for maximum
transparency on
the one hand and fine-grained management of publicity of texts
on the
other hand. It is designed to have a comprehensible structure
and to
be easy to maintain - if you want it. From a technical point of
it is easy to have all this - if you want it.

Sure. Like I said above, it may seem really easy to you, but to me
aspects are quite obscure. Frankly I find it quite clunky compared to
website software I have worked with such as wikis (Wikipedia, P2P
Foundation) or blogs (Wordpress); though it may offer site management
functionalities that these others don't.

Well, things reached a point where I need to make a personal
If the rest of the project agrees with this rule of chaos then
it is
fine with me. However, I'll stop putting energy in this project.

Guess what, I've wondered the very same thing over the last few
I keep working with someone whose reply to a direct question in an
sent may come in a week, or a month, or more. Everyone has their own
and all, but this is the first time I've had that experience. To be
I have found this incredibly frustrating at times but have always bit
tongue (until now) for the good of the project. I would never presume
call this method of working "chaotic", maybe you can come up with

If you would prefer transparency, however, I'll try to continue to
persuade Mathieu of solutions which build transparency as easy
as a
finger snip.

OK, I'm all for transparency as well, though I can't help noticing
want submissions to be non-transparent. At the same time, I'm the
the journal, so I get to select some reviewers and to tell people
think about their papers. This seems to me pretty normal.
I will obviously also be put in a position where some people contact
directly and I may acquire more information than everyone else over
issues. Then again I have always reported on everything that was
If you look around the Internet at webzines, online newspapers,
magazines, I'd be interested for you to point me to an example of a
similarly open approach to editing a journal? I'm not saying there
any, I'm just saying I really don't think I'm being that secretive.

One thing I did wrong (and I'm not saying that was my only mistake)
relation to George Dafermos' early suggestions for the review
agree that I should have stated more clearly why I thought they were
appropriate (old, some already published elsewhere). These were
meant to test the peer review process: but since then we found
stuff to work with which we can actually publish. If George or anyone
has original material which they want to submit please do so.
@ George (if you are reading): sorry for not dealing with this more

So to sum up I agree to try to use the site more. For my part, I
appreciate a little gesture once in a while along the lines of
right now, will respond to this email later".



Comments are wholeheartedly appreciated.



Dr Mathieu O'Neil
Adjunct Research Fellow
Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute
College of Arts and Social Science
The Australian National University
email: mathieu.oneil[at]

[2 text/html]

Dr Athina Karatzogianni
Lecturer in Media, Culture and Society
The Dean's Representative (Chinese Partnerships)
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
The University of Hull
United Kingdom
T: ++44 (0) 1482 46 5790
F: ++44 (0) 1482 466107,_culture_and_society/staff/karatzogianni,_dr_athina.aspx

Check out Athina's work

Russian hackers

[2 text/html]

[2 text/html]

P2P Foundation: <>   - <>

Connect:; <;/>


Think tank:

[2 text/html]

This email is intended solely for the addressee.  It may contain private
and confidential information.  If you are not the intended addressee, please
take no action based on it nor show a copy to anyone.  In this case, please
reply to this email to highlight the error.  Opinions and information in
this email that do not relate to the official business of Nottingham Trent
University shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by the
Nottingham Trent University has taken steps to ensure that this email and
any attachments are virus-free, but we do advise that the recipient should
check that the email and its attachments are actually virus free.  This is
in keeping with good computing practice.

[2 application/ms-tnef]

P2P Foundation:  -

Connect:; Discuss:


Think tank:

[2 text/html]

Thread: joxT00448 Message: 7/44 L6 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00457 [Homepage] [Navigation]