- pls note: it's important how a panel begins. This will be displayed whenever someone forks. - have a look at the Charters / wikihouse principles, they are great. I still need to assess the language these charters give us, but it's awsome to see how some of them are to the point, I will continue collecting - Re the Formatting: pls make sure the titles of the books and essays are correct + add the year of publication; editing the "Sources" is a bit boring; also: I think we should do the formatting of the sources in Markdown, so that we automatically create a new line for each entry without creating a new paragraph, see f.e. my reformatting of sources in Produce Cosmo-Locally - PLEASE USE THE QUOTE-FUNCTION IF YOU QUOTE - open from the factory with html and type <blockquote> before you start the sentence, no need to close unless you continue in the same paragraph. if you do so you close with </blockquote> - instead of "website" -> "html" or "wiki" or "fedwiki" or "pdf", i.e. the type of document
- I was just looking - via our framework - not via the search function or the recent changes - for the charter section and found it - obviously - in "constituting tools. But this also belongs to commoning and governance, to the whole "shared purpose and values" issue. What I realize is, that if we make the inter-linkages, we really can start putting it all together.; so, I'll try to care more for the interlinkages
Provisioning through commons Panel
General comments on all panels about dimensions of provisioning:
we should start with a short description of what we mean be the principle and THEN add an "picture this and that situation" --> this gets us down to Earth and in the writing mode! Add an image then a more detailed explanation of the meaning then a list of examples I've tried to do this with Pool & Share have a look. what are cooperative bylaws?
Cap & Share or Mutualize is new, but at some point I still wanna include REDD + need to discuss the characteristica as opposed to Cap & Trade
DB: REDD is the perfect example for why one should cap & share but not trade -- because trade & market exchange severs a commitment to intrinsic value and use value, and thus to preservation of the resource & community.
TO BE DISCUSSED: UNCONDITIONAL GIVING and DISTRIBUTED VS DECENTRALIZED ... DB: DIFFERENT TYPES OF GIVING/RECEIVING MAY NEED TO BE ACKNOWLEDGED: UNCONDITIONAL GIVING WITH NO EXPECTATION OF A RETURN; INDIRECT RECIPROCITY; HYBRID MARKET/COMMONS; TRUST-BASED ALLOCATIONS; ....ETC.
- FOR LATER on the topic of POSSESSION OVER PROPERTY, which still needs to be explained; I was wondering: is "possession" a "customary social practice", or is it "modern law". I guess both - it's our daily experience - f.i. when we rent a flat or sit on a public bench. DB: Possession is a customary social practice, but "modern law" does not usually recognize & enforce it. (There is a bitter saying, "Possession is nine-tenths of the law," meaning he who possesses nearly owns something as a de facto matter.) SH: oh, that's interesting. Will reflect upon when trying to write down a short explanation. Here is a thing: We might go back to roman law, because possession in US law might be different from Besitz (= possession) in German law
Governance of Commons
comments abt Governance of Commons - SH-> kept all examples in a specific governance panel; where we would need a short intro ( btw: What do we understand by governance if we ask at the same time: who needs a government? - Why would this be a governance principle?: Co-operatives with representative voting for management and board DB: Because it is a widely used structure among cooperatives. Would co-ops with such governance therefore NOT be commons? I'm not claiming this is progressive, but it IS a common reality (as are tribal forms of commoning). PHONE: "COMMON REALITY" vs "COMMONS" ( "Organizational Form" vs. Commons - but of course, cooperatives can also be understood as philosophies SH: co-operatives, at least in Germany, are organizational forms of working for the market or working for the commons, in fact: the organizational form itself doesn#t really matter. We even have "shareholder enterprises" which are more "commonistic" than co-operatives - DB: it seems that isolated tribes with limited state or market contact ARE a widespread and distinct form of commons. And its governance, accordingly, is more distinct from most western and non-traditional models that we may cite. DISCUSS: WHICH EXAMPLES TO QUOTE IN GENERAL?
We need to redo the general Provisioning through commons panel, one's we've done the dimensions
State Functions for Commoning
Deferred to Later: See Subpanel Discussion State Functions for Commoning
others
- former discussion points: Governing market-commons interaction, Where to place ENLIVENING?, What does ontological absolute mean? - find notes for you at socialization tools SEE MY RESPONSE ON THAT PAGE.