Talk:Commons-based peer production

Wikipedia Ambassador Program assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at University of Wikipedia supported by WikiProject Wikipedia and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2011 Q3 term. Further details are available on the course page.

Above message substituted from {{WAP assignment}} on 15:30, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Untitled

he i dont know how wiki works and i wont learn it but thetre a french translation

"Commons-based peer production" est un terme poussé par Yochai Benkler[1] professeur de l'école de droit a Havard. Ce terme décrit un nouveau model de production socio-économique dans le quel l'énergie creative de grand nombre de personnes est coordoné (habituelement avec l'aide d'internet) en large projets Principalement depourvu d'organisation hiérarchique traditionel. Ces projets sont souvant, mais pas toujours consu sans compensation financiere pour les contributeurs. Le terme est souvant interchanger avec le mot 'social production'.

Commons-based peer production is a term coined by Harvard Law School professor .[1] It describes a new model of socio-economic production in which the creative energy of large numbers of people is coordinated (usually with the aid of the Internet) into large, meaningful projects mostly without traditional hierarchical organization. These projects are often, but not always, conceived without financial compensation for contributors. The term is often used interchangeably with the term social production. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.242.221.106 (talk) 15:10, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Open Community

Hi, I am editing the article and reorganizing some ideas. Any feedback would be helpful. I am also wondering how the section on open community directly ties into commons-based peer production. I cannot find a clear link between this section and the previous one. Rachael2 (talk) 20:06, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

New sections for the article

I added two new sections to this articles: Principles , Advantages . These parts were missing and I believe by adding these sections to the article , the concept of common based peer production is more meaningful and clear ( it serves the flow of the content better ).

Another change was finding the relative reference for the "Open Community Project" section which was missing for a long time, now the article looks more legitimate since it includes proper citations.

Minor editing such as word revision was done as well to improve the overall quality of the article. Few concepts in article were linked to other wiki pages for more information and clarity.

Your feedback is highly appreciated. Amin Saket16:06, 25 October 2011 (UTC)16:06, 25 October 2011 (UTC)~~

Proposed merger

I placed the {{mergefrom}} template on this page, because I believe the uncapitalised title follows convention, but I'm not certain. Alan Pascoe 17:20, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Merge This is a text book example of a page needing merging. Someone forgot to check if a similar page already existed. --David Youngberg 04:42, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Invention

I prefer wiki invention, where the users say what they need and appear free standards about how to obtain it. See OScar. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.87.96.65 (talk) 14:59, 13 May 2007 (UTC).

External Links

I removed one link to a blog - since there are hundreds/thousands of blogs about cbpp ... but I left the second link to http://www.osdd.org/index.htm ... tho I think that one should go too. Perhaps it can be added to the "examples" section?Mackinaw (talk) 01:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Pirate Bay link in examples section

I'm not sure peer sharing is the same as peer production. Peer production is about creation, not pirating - should this be removed? --CharlesC (talk) 23:23, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Commons-based peer production vs peer production

I did read the articles, but don't understand the difference, could somebody please clarify? Teilolondon (talk) 08:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

How about an example? Say two people in a village wanted to write a book together. Peer production is if they went to each other's houses and collaborated to publish a book to the rest of the village. Commons-based peer production would be if they went every day to the public square to write their book, and asked anyone who showed up to help. In other words: peer production is simple group collaboration in any format. Commons-based peer production is peer production in an open commons. Make more sense? The reason there are separate articles is because peer production covers really wide territory, while commons-based peer production is really quite specific in how it works. Steven Walling 08:34, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

This example is complete rubbish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.110.32 (talk) 13:47, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Relationship to crowdsourcing

I have noticed some confusion in the popular and academic press regarding the relationship between commons-based peer production and crowdsourcing, and I wonder if it may be worthwhile to describe this relationship, especially because this article links to crowdsourcing but does not provide any context. There seem to be three possible interpretations. The first is that both are identical. The second is that CBPP is a subset of crowdsourcing. The third is that both terms overlap, but are not identical, because crowdsourcing may include more simplistic and hierarchical actions that may not contribute to a larger project, while CBPP could be performed by a defined group of individuals. This of course depends on one's interpretation of both terms. Ideas? GhostModern (talk) 03:33, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

crowdsourcing

Crowdsourcing is a bullshit corporate term. Commons production or protection is grounded in the work of Elinor Ostrom. If you are going to use economic terms you might care to reference the giants in the field. But the quality of this particular entry fits with "crowdsourcing" better than production and protection of the commons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.56.95.221 (talk) 17:19, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Merge from Open community

In 2010 the article on open community was merged and redirected here, without any discussion. Should it be restored? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:41, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Needs definition of Commons

I think this article would benefit from a clearer definition of commons.--Tcgriffin (talk) 00:38, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

==FLOK society section This should not be deleted but marked as a “scam” (hence for an encyclopedia reported under “trivia") ... all the evidence I can gather show that this was never an Ecuadorian government plan and that some proponents of commons-based peer-production were probably tricked into contributing to the scheme -- see http://www.cookreport.com/pdfs/July-augCRecuadorfinal.pdf and https://www.facebook.com/groups/p2p.open/permalink/769370916440423/) --Ptroxler (talk) 22:19, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Bitcoin and commons-based peer production

The P2PValue has provided some very nice diagrams, but, with all due respect, they may be giving undue weight to certain ideas, namely Bitcoin. Its relevance is unclear and unsupported by the body of the article, which does not mention it at all. Moreover, the article talks about the anti-capitalist nature of commons-based peer production, and Bitcoin therefore seems unsuitable. I however don't know how to address this without editing it out and making sure the diagrams reflect more what the article is saying. BeŻet (talk) 12:43, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Is CBPP really opposed to capitalism?

The article has several sections that claim that CBPP is some kind of alternative or growth-path out of capitalism. It seems to me that CBPP would work equally well in capitalism, communism, socialism, feudalism, fascism, etc; it is orthogonal to the economic model of the underlying society. If other editors agree, then let's straighten out this kink in the article. Gnuish (talk) 19:40, 25 March 2024 (UTC)