Message 00739 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00615 Message: 50/65 L13 [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]

Ridiculous arguments (was: [jox] Journal report - 19 August 2011)

Hi Mathieu!

Note: I didn't read the newer messages yet.

2 weeks (17 days) ago Mathieu ONeil wrote:

Still waiting to hear from Maurizio and Vincenzo on how they want to address the criticism by StefanMn that they are not properly addressing the issue. So far StefanMz has expressed support for StefanMn. This is an edited version of what I wrote on the issue on july 21: 

I didn't respond to that. You, Mathieu, don't respond to rudeness, I
don't respond to obvious ridiculousness. Well, since you really seem
to mean it I think it's better to point out.

First your edited version dropped one important point:

  Last month (46 days ago) Mathieu ONeil wrote:
  > first, aside from the merits or demerits of your perspective, it is clear that it has - so far - not much support in the journal, aside from StefanMz that is

I have no idea from what you can conclude that. There is either some
secret communication off-list which convince you of this or you are
trying to make it this way. In any case from the communication on-list
I can not conclude this. Moreover, IMHO there is not really two

"I understand what you say about peer production being a new
phenomenon, but I don't see how it can be separated from the 95%
rest of the world economy which is capitalistic. PP is both
dependent on and enmeshed within this wider order.

This reads as if I would not do this. This is absolutely ridiculous.
For instance I always emphasize that peer production is useful for
*both* classes and that this is fine. IMHO this is a clear indication
how intertwined peer production is with capitalism - though in a way
the left usually is not able to grasp because it doesn't match
black-and-white patterns...

For me the interesting thing scientifically is precisely to work out
the relationship between these two orders and - possibly from a more
activist perspective - to work out how to extend the commons and
peer production

Again this reads as if this would not be my interest. This is again
ridiculous. For instance I'm all for empirical studying this
relationship and I'm happy that this happens more and more.

To be clear: I said, that to be useful you need to use a *new set of
tools* for *understanding* peer production. The tool set of the ancien
regime in spe is not useful for this and at best misleading. I'm not
saying that I have these tools already - I'm probably far from that.
What I say is: be open-minded and look at what happens in peer
production - especially when it contradicts traditional knowledge! In
fact an ability which is unfortunately rare throughout the left :-( .

(...) if you want to get your point across effectively IMHO it would
be best to submit a paper to the journal for our upcoming issue on
peer production theory - that way you can explain what new tools and
concepts are needed etc. A whole issue on Oekonux can be envisaged
for later, we don't have the writing and editorial resources right
now. The peer production theory issue can be released next December.
Is an article possible?"

Thanks for the offer but after building up strawmen and front lines
above this sounds somewhat strange...

Mathieu, this project started after the fourth Oekonux Conference and
I understood that it's goal is to keep this spirit. My impression is
that you are fighting this spirit behind the scenes - like with
setting up parties and using ridiculous arguments like above but also
with other stuff.

Mathieu, if you want to make CSPP (or how you are going to call it
tomorrow) something which contradicts Oekonux then this is your
decision I have to respect. From a few seasoned leftists during all
these years I heard things like "Oekonux is something which restores
hope - *although* it is not the same old stuff!". In fact this is why
I like Oekonux and it's spirit. If you want to move this project to
the same old, same old then you should make this clear ASAP. Then
everyone here can make a decision on how to proceed. BTW: A mixture of
same old and new open-mindedness seems stupid to me because it doesn't
serve anybody really.



Thread: joxT00615 Message: 50/65 L13 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00739 [Homepage] [Navigation]