[p2p-research] Fwd: A Resoc reminder - and new information about polling Resoc Content

Michel Bauwens michelsub2004 at gmail.com
Thu Aug 13 12:55:15 CEST 2009

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: michael albert <sysop at zmag.org>
Date: Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 9:25 PM
Subject: A Resoc reminder - and new information about polling Resoc Content


This message is sent to 105 people each of whom have submitted at least one
essay for the Reimagining Society Project. Thanks you all very much for
doing so!

About 35 of you have also contributed at least one comment, some have
contributed quite a few comments, and some have also written essays in
reaction to other people’s work. Again, Thank you!

Still, the above accounting means about 70 of you have submitted an opening
essay but have not yet commented at all, and of the 35 people who have
commented, many have commented only on their own piece, not on other

As incredible as a project generating 150 essays on vision and strategy is –
and we think we will attain that level by the end of this month – the real
dynamism and innovation of this effort requires that people interact. The
road to exemplary success, that is, involves more dialog than we are
generating so far – not so much from those who are already really active,
rather, from the rest.

We all write. We all hope others will read and think about our words, will
carefully assess them, challenge them, and extend them – with us and with
others. Shouldn’t we interact in that fashion with other people’s work, as
well, then? Of course we are all very busy. But, still, we have the
opportunity here to do something quite special.

For those who haven’t yet tried, it is not difficult to add either a
comment, or even a reply essay, to other people’s submissions. Just access
the submission you are interested in via the participant page or the article
page of the project site – which is at
http://www.zcommunications.org/zparecon/reimaginingsociety.htm - read to the
bottom of the essay you are interested in, and then click to comment or
click to react with an essay reply. We advise that you write your words in a
text program or word processor before clicking to engage, however, and that
you then copy and paste your effort into the form that will appear once you
do click, and then of course that you click to submit/save.

Beyond the above, we want to reiterate that as per the initial project
definition, once there has been ample time for discussion and exchange, we
are going to try to see where people stand.

To do this – and as people who have submitted essays, you may wish to begin
relating to this need even now – we are going to ask the authors of essays
to send us a list of what they feel are the key claims or commitments that
derive from their articles. We will then construct a poll about these,
trying to make the list as succinct as possible, without leaving anything
out, however.

Poll questions will then go something like this – with all questions having
the same form -

We write out a key claim or commitment that some resoc author wants tallied,
such as reject private ownership of productive assets, or perhaps, establish
and employ a democratic centralist vanguard party, or maybe, advocate and
seek balanced job complexes in our own projects and our sought society, and
so on – maybe there are twenty, thirty, or however many claims...each
sustaining its own question, where of course the claims are explained a bit,
too – and perhaps have links to some essays from which they arise. Then the
question, asked about each claim is:

If a left movement or organization were to espouse the above stance as part
of its definition/agenda would its doing so:

1. Be a prerequisite for your involvement so that without this stance as an
agreed commitment, you would not belong.
2. Cause you to be very pleased and make it more likely you would become
involved, but not be absolutely necessary.
3. Be okay with you, but only modestly increase your likelihood of
4. Be barely okay or neutral or barely negative to you, but have no bearing
on your involvement.
5. Be a negative in your view but only modestly diminish your likelihood of
6. Cause you to have real misgivings and deter your likelihood of
involvement, but not alone rule it out.
7. Be a deal breaker for you; with this stance as an agreed commitment, you
would not belong.

The goal o this polling will be to reveal the level of agreement and
disagreement, overall, and claim by claim – to fuel additional discussion
and see if we have a basis for extending and enlarging the project.

Thank you again for your involvement,

Michael Albert and Bill Fletcher
For Resoc

Work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University - Research:
http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html - Think thank:

P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net

Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:

Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20090813/17a71556/attachment.html>

More information about the p2presearch mailing list