Jul
12

The iCommons is a network

The iCommons is a network. A network is defined by nodes that are connected by links. Even to the terminology designated by the board of “nodes” for the projects linked together in the iCommons, we are a network.

I suggest that in the discussions among iCommoners, what is known about network structure and theory should guide how such things as inclusion and governance are done. We should be very careful about getting drawn into a storm brewed by pre-network theories of organization.

In the 1950s when I was studying political science at Northwestern University, the chairman of the department, Professor William McGovern, taught us that power in a political structure can only move in two directions: down (tyranny) or up (democracy). McGovern died before network theory came along, but as his student I would tell him now that there is a third way that power moves in the 21st century: laterally, sideways, virtually, omindirectionally.

The iCommons can be seen as a first grand experiment of a global network toward a shared purpose. Obviously that purpose has to open for the network to function, and the purpose of opening cultures seems ideal to me for this grand experiment.

My sense of the leadership at final iSummit ’06 meeting was to aim to link up nodes — and not to create a top-down control. Out of 20th century habit there is a natural urge to push for power from a bottom up. But a network has no top or bottom. It seems possible to me that iCommons can be a network that is a conversation through the year and a congregation at an annual iSummit. If that can happen, the achievements of the component nodes can be both unimpaired and enthused by being a node in the iCommons network.

Where would I tell Professor McGovern that the leadership and financing are in the network? My best guess is that they will continue to emerge dynamically and pattern themselves in response to the activities of the nodes — and not the other way around. That is what happened to create iSummit ’06, and I hope it continues.


5 Responses to “The iCommons is a network”



Trackbacks & Pingbacks
  1. » Pingback by iCommons » Blog Archive » IRC Meeting: Discuss the future of iCommons

Your Comments
  1. Mathias Klang Says:

    Check out my reply at http://www.ituniv.se/~klang/wrote/2006/07/12/the-missing-ideology-of-creative-commons/

  2. xxx Says:

    “The iCommons can be seen as a first grand experiment of a global network toward a shared purpose. Obviously that purpose has to open for the network to function, and the purpose of opening cultures seems ideal to me for this grand experiment.”

    not true. 1. is not the first (is not the free software movement a global network toward a shared purpose?) 2. It’s not global, it’s mainly (and controlled by) US and Europe.

  3. Judy Breck Says:

    My main purpose in this post, which I also included as a response on the iCommons conversation, was to make a positive statement about the way iCommons has been established. I have no background or stake in the iCommons, and am essentially just and observer.

    If iCommons follows the form that the free software movement has, that seems to me a good thing. The iCommons is different from the software movement because the software movement networked ideas primarily, not people. (I’m splitting hairs perhaps.) I do stand by the idea that iCommons is a first grand experiment, and I hope very much that it will become truly global in fulfillment, as well as it is now in intent.

  4. Eve Gray Says:

    In response to Gilberto Gil’s challenge to us at the iCommons Summit to learn to ‘connect the differences’, I would like to suggest that we take a look at the similarities between the networked structure described here by Judy and the functioning of pre-colonial societies in my part of the world: the south-east coast of South Africa. The history of colonial conquest in this region is a familiar one of political and social structures being radically altered or destroyed by colonists whose frame of reference could not extend beyond the hierarchical structure of the nation state. There are lessons for us in this history, I suspect and not dissimilar (if less dramatic) risks if we approach the idea of a network in a similar state of incomprehension. Such a comparison could also provide the foundation for very interesting learning materials, leading students to understand just how much our imaginations are constrained by received patterns of thought in our own communities.
    This is also a challenge to XXX above, who claims that the Commons is not global – I certainly don’t see it that way from this remote corner of the developing world.
    If you are intrested, I have spelled out this argument in more detail in my blog at http://blogs.uct.ac.za/blog/gray_area

Leave Your Comment

  • <
  • Articles by Judy Breck

  • Categories



  • GoldenSwamp image entryways:


    www.flickr.com
    This is a Flickr badge showing photos in a set called goldenswamp. Make your own badge here.