Category talk:Companies: Difference between revisions
(Criteria of choice for the short "The P2P Company hall of fame" list?) |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
tibi | tibi | ||
** | |||
Hi Tib, you may have noticed this page/section hasn't been updated in a long long while, and Meraki was updated when it still promised to support horizontal civic meshworks ... so it should indeed disappear from there. It would really be great if you could help improve this page, and perhaps we could build a list of the top x of p2p companies before the end of the year? According to clear criteria.? | |||
--[[User:Mbauwens|MIchel Bauwens]] ([[User talk:Mbauwens|talk]]) 10:48, 21 October 2012 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 10:48, 21 October 2012
What are the criteria of choice for the short "The P2P Company hall of fame" list???
Out of hundreds of other examples, you've chosen Meraki among other 4 entities, which has the effect of misleading readers about the essence of the p2p economy.
Meraki enables p2p exchanges, but it is far from embracing the values behind the p2p movement. It is a classical hierarchical structure, a corporation, selling proprietary software. Meraky is as p2p as Google and Facebook are.
Please accept my offer to collaborate with you to improve this page. I am ready to deploy a lot of energy to have this page cleaned of misrepresentations.
thanks!
tibi
Hi Tib, you may have noticed this page/section hasn't been updated in a long long while, and Meraki was updated when it still promised to support horizontal civic meshworks ... so it should indeed disappear from there. It would really be great if you could help improve this page, and perhaps we could build a list of the top x of p2p companies before the end of the year? According to clear criteria.?
--MIchel Bauwens (talk) 10:48, 21 October 2012 (UTC)