2 Matching Annotations
  1. Nov 2017
    1. Itisreallyimportanttoconsiderthemasspeechactsandaskwhatclaimstheybringintobeinginorbymakingdeclarationsaboutrights.ItiseasytodismissthesedeclarationsthattheInternethasoccasioned,buttheyalsobegexamination.Somedismissthemfortheirostensibleineffectiveness,butthisisunderstoodintermsofconstativeratherthanperformativeeffects.Thequestionwe’dratheraskiswhat,ifany,imaginaryandperformativeifnotlegalforcedotheyhave?

      Esto me recuerda la intensión de escribir manifiestos en mu ypocas JSL, a la que yo me opuse, quizás por su percibida inefectividad con respecto a actos más performativos y enactivos. Quiźas me faltó entenderlo en esos mismos términos en lugar de como actos púramente enunciativos.



  2. Dec 2016
    1. In pure consensus everyone essentially has a veto. So, if I don’t want something to happen I’m in a strong position of power over everyone that wants something to happen. They have to convince me and I don’t have to convince anyone else of anything.To avoid this we use a system called “consensus seeking” which has a long history outside of open source. It’s quite simple, just attempt to reach a consensus, if a consensus can’t be reached then call for a majority wins vote.Just the fact that a vote is a possibility means that people can’t be obstructionists, whether someone favor a change or not, they have to convince their peers and if they aren’t willing to put in the work to convince their peers then they probably don’t involve themselves in that decision at all.

      Esto sería clave para iniciativas como las que se pactan en las JSL, por ejemplo respecto al nombre del colectivo empresarial. No pasa mucho en comunidades pequeñas, como las de Grafoscopio, actualmente.