<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" version="2.0" xml:lang="en-us">
  <channel>
    <title>Comments on Web 2.0 Expo 2008: Clay Shirky on continuing collective action through social networking</title>
    <link>http://www.viddler.com/explore/daspark/videos/32/</link>
    <description>A feed showing comments on this specific video</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 27 Dec 2009 11:55:04 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:date>2009-12-27T11:55:04Z</dc:date>
    
    <item>
      <title>Web 2.0 Expo 2008: Clay Shirky on continuing collective action through social networking</title>
      <link>http://www.viddler.com/explore/daspark/videos/32/comments/1</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.viddler.com/explore/mbauwens/&quot; &gt;mbauwens&lt;/a&gt; posted a comment (0:0-1):&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure that there are no sustainability communities that are primarily online, amongst the 1 million estimated by David Korten. See for example the emerging field of open design communities (&lt;a href="http://p2pfoundation.net/category:design,"&gt;http://p2pfoundation.net/Category:Design,&lt;/a&gt; see in particularly our product hacking page).&#xD;
&#xD;
What I think is key is the distinguish the sphere of abundance which enables self-aggregation and can be peer governed, and the sphere of the infrastructure of cooperation, which is scarce and costly, and may require a formal organization. But the latter should in no way impinge on the former. Thus, the NGO model is turned around: the community is primary, the ngo just a technical means to enable the community; as long as the first is 'open and free', and the second is 'participatory' and both are united in a web of trust, I think the model can work, and I believe there are indeed thousands of such communities already.&#xD;
&#xD;
Of course, I may have misunderstood Clay's argument.&#xD;
&#xD;
Michel&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.viddler.com/explore/mbauwens/&quot; &gt;&lt;img src=&quot;http://www.viddler.com/store/big_unknown.gif&quot; border=&quot;0&quot; /&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <enclosure url="http://www.viddler.com/player/e6decd32/" length="8" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" />
      <pubDate>Sun, 15 Jun 2008 05:51:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>http://www.viddler.com/explore/daspark/videos/32/comments/1</guid>
      <dc:creator>mbauwens</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2008-06-15T05:51:07Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

