ouch -- is that how emergence works? or emergency? ...?

hope this will get clarified...

keep on truckin', Brad: what a long, strange trip it's been...

;D nmw

what a long, strange trip it's been...

can't agree more!! :)

Big surprise :)

What a friggin Joke: Mark Grimes was the worst abuser of negative points on the system --

Ned is Dead: look how Omidyar is backing Razoo -- Haney sent me (and probably everyone else) 4 PMs encouraging me to join Razoo. (which looks like a great improvement over o/net)

As well as an ad in the Transition area.

And "The Board" -- probably a bunch of anal-retentive control freaks.

And what a horribly un-visual site it is!

And listen to Jim bark orders :)

--- broadband problems -- gotta go (the hotspot I'm at is closing :(

Harry Lime, you make me laugh all the time. Clearly the folks over at Ned are expecting lots of us trouble makers to discover the site sooner or later. I get the distinct impression that it's later than sooner they're hoping for. Ned could have come up in recent conversations with people there--lol and it seems that it wasn't mentioned to me wasn't an oversight.

I don't really see it as evidence that Omidyar is backing Razoo because Haney sent an email about Razoo. Haney has been consistent in encouraging others at some of the various sites.

Ned is a good fit for some here. I was particularly concerned about LiA and glad they'll have the Ned site.

On the other hand it seems to me that the user interface of this Omidyar.net tool set has a rather steep learning curve--the same problem with AboutUs. That limits the involvement of the community.

A few of the Ugandans from Gulu have ventured into Facebook and Razoo. I hope they find some value there. Omidyar.net and Ned starting out trends pretty old. Facebook is big universe with plenty of other young people there. So it just seems Razoo and Facebook offer something good for them.

I like Razoo. Who knows whether that site will really jell, but right now it seems fun to me.

I don't believe that Ned is about freedom of speech. It's about cultivating peace and bountiful prosperity. In a garden, this would involve pulling the weeds to let the delectables grow. We haven't finalized the ground rules, but hope to soon, and that will clarify any misunderstandings, and avoid future surprises.

Thank you Brad. This event has reassured everyone at Ned that the noise that existed at Omidyar.net is something that's entirely avoidable.

yeah well Jim

Jim says "I don't believe that Ned is about freedom of speech"

Jim & <ned> supporters,

Everything! is about Freedom of Speech!

once you start censoring those that disagree with you, not only do you stop learning but you also will end up surrounding yourself with only those who think just like you!! What made ONet great was that it attracted many, many different minds & souls! we learned many things from them! we even learned from what you call 'annoying' criticism!'

just to point out,

these are the current tags that have been given this thread by <ned> supporters,

Tags: rant troll drivel

sadly this is currently the same type of treatment you will find at ned,

how & why they think that using tagging & rating/point TOOLS manipulated into weaponry is a better way to address issues than to make an effort to actually write something about it is beyond me!!

Brad - seems you no longer advocate transparent feedback

cool!! it speaks!

so, Peter, what's it like 'kissing ass' every day?

and btw,

Peter got duly rewarded for tagging my <ned> posts 'troll' by being promoted to the <ned> prestigious board!

GOOD JOB!! Peter!

Brad Byrne (CCAL30) said:

cool!! it speaks!

so, Peter, what's it like 'kissing ass' every day?

Actually I tagged your post as "happy troll". Seems you enjoy the label. You wear it well.

Things that make you go, hmmm ...

Brad Byrne

Feedback given: 6637 positive and 166 negative

Comment feedback received: 1527 (+1560/-33)

Tagging feedback received: 0 (+0/0)

Member since: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 06:53:31 PDT

Peter Rees

Feedback given: 7953 positive and 0 negative

Comment feedback received: 1559 (+1562/-3)

Tagging feedback received: 16 (+16/0)

Member since: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 16:29:53 PDT

Interesting, Meron:

Brad and Peter have received about the same amount of positive comment feedback.

What do you find interesting about the points that you've bolded? Do you know anything about why those feedback points were given? To me, those numbers seem relatively meaningless. Maybe you can explain your "reasoning" (for "going hmmm") a little more?

Jim Carroll wrote:

"I don't believe that Ned is about freedom of speech. It's about cultivating peace and bountiful prosperity. In a garden, this would involve pulling the weeds to let the delectables grow. We haven't finalized the ground rules, but hope to soon, and that will clarify any misunderstandings, and avoid future surprises. Thank you Brad. This event has reassured everyone at Ned that the noise that existed at Omidyar.net is something that's entirely avoidable."

"Cultivating peace" is quite a different metaphor from "making peace." "Cultivating peace" leads to a set of metaphors reinforcing a Manichean view of the world where peace is maintained by expelling undesirables and fencing them out. "Pulling the weeds" follows the frame that the problems are always "them."

I'm in awe of Jim Carroll's technical abilities, yet I'm more skeptical of his techno-utopianism. Ethan Zuckerman wrote a blog post " Fred Turner: the rhetoric of cyberutopianism" a review of Turner's book From Counterculture to Cyberculture.

I may be really off the mark in reading into Zuckerman's piece, but the meaning I draw from it is that cyperutopianism fails because it devolves from oversimplification of complex systems.

"Noise" in my view is not "entirely avoidable" nor am I convinced that avoiding noise entirely is desirable. Certainly I don't believe that all that's needed is a technical fix.

One of my great pleasures of discovering Omidyar.net was meeting RicHARD Makepeace here. RicHARD demonstrate that peace is not a static state but rather a quality in dynamic systems.

I love to garden, so I love gardening metaphors. But the specter of "pulling weeds" when it come to community building strikes me as wrong. One of the foundations of Omidyar.net is:

"Every individual has the power to make a difference."

"Pulling the weeds" yuck! The questions the cadre of organizers should be asking are about processes that enable and empower participants rather than how high to build the walls and what special privileges the cadre of right-thinking decent "owners" should have.

The difficulty with "noise" is the plain fact that people often disagree. Communities will always be noisy. It seems to me the task isn't to banish noise but amplifying positive actions.

Good points, John!

I recall that as a child I once gardened for a woman who insisted on cultivating weeds (no, not herbs -- weeds ;).

Anyways (or rather: However): Who thinks there is a difference between disagreement and noise? I think I can disagree with someone in a very clear way. Am I being clear, John?

I realize it's probably nitpicking, but I think what you said in another thread today about liking how adults can disagree and nonetheless maintain a modicum of civility would be spot on in this case.

Now I'm gonna go take a bath (always a good answer to mud wrestling at o.net ;) !!

:D nmw

Good Posts!!

IN MY OPINION

moderating <ned> is not really about 'pulling weeds' or 'cutting out the noise', it is about 'making money'!

IN MY OPINION

Mark's time spent on ONet was also about 'making money' On ONet Mark was the 'Master' at using the point system and private PM's & phone calls to create a following that gave him power in how funds were disbursed, He as well as Jim wish to repeat this type of control at <ned> and that is why they do not want to remove the 'anonymous negative point giving feature'

and any talk or discussion that might reduce their tools for control will continuously be met with moderative removing of posts and accounts!

END OF OPINION/S

Norbert was the one who reminded me when I first landed here that Omidyar.net had a history and I couldn't really neglect the importance of it.

I don't know the history well. The evidence I've seen about Mark Grimes hardly comports with Brad's opinion that it's all about the money for him. But I'm sure to admit that I'm not a Omidyar.net historian.

Money matters and while I'm no good at money, I don't imagine those who are as merely money grabbers. How to sustain the <Ned> site is surely going to need a solution. So paying attention to that is a real responsibility that I respect.

I'm very happy that <Ned> is up and running! And I don't mean to be overly negative about the process of community building going on there. Indeed, my perspective is that community building is a messy business. I'm a gardener, so I enjoy getting my hands dirty.

NMW is right to point to a distinction between disagreement and noise. Noise can be unctuous fawning as well as it can be argument.

Every community needs disagreement as well as validation of others. The point that NMW makes so well is that it's the quality of response which is important, so quantitative measures are always going to be imprecise.

I'm not alone in wanting <Ned> to prosper, opinions differ of course. I do hope that as the birthing process of <Ned> proceeds the principals there will avoid needlessly imagining enemies.

The tool set of Omidyar.net requires a level of commitment that will as a matter of course restrict and color the participants of <Ned>. For the most part it seems the users who will be willing to make that commitment will be people who have much to offer.

The tags for this thread: troll rant drivel inane, struck me as childish and uncharitable. By casting aspersions here, it feels to me actions in the present will make for a more difficult future at the <Ned> site. As far as the tagging here goes, the old rule: "Don't feed the trolls" seems the better part of valor. In this case I don't see any trolling going on.

ok, well I have to admit my OPINION might have been a little extreme, I agree that Mark also cares about the projects and missions that he supports,

but the power issue is still there IMO,

and further this whole thing, 99% of all the disputes at ONet and to be at <ned> will be born from the 'un-level' playing field.

if <ned> and Mark, would simply see that the ONLY fair way, and therefore powerful way for the community (not the board) were to implement one-member/one-vote rating systems then 99% of the gaming would disappear! and the best & most needed projects will prevail!

hehe!! couldn't have said it better myself!!

Brad said; "the best & most needed projects will prevail!"

but <ned> doesn't care about that! do they?

Since when did freedom of speech give anyone the right to be heard ?

Grimes Fairy Tales

from <NED>: http://www.omidyar.net/user/u746 967553/news/7/

Harry, whilst I doubt that I could improve on Mark's opinion of himself I also believe that your personal vendetta and personal abuse has gone too far.

And that, quite simply, is why I have used ten meaningless points to try to fold your last contribution.

Harry, the day I need lectures from you is the day I will book into your trailer park.