THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
Ecuador - the Denouement
The Very Strange End of the FLOK
“Integrity and reputation is something that is hard to build, and quick to be lost.” Michel
Bauwens, Flok Research list May 6, 2014
Volume XXIII, Nos. 6-7
September October 2014
ISSN 1071 - 6327
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 1
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
Contents
Ecuador: the Denouement or very Strange
End of the FLOK
(part 2 of Sept -Oct COOK Report)
Executive Summary!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
The Very Strange End of the Flok
Background -- The Operation and Mission of the
P2P Foundation
Some American Perspectives
What Happened
June 29 Bauwens
July 3rd Here it gets truly bizarre.
July 4
July 5 A parting of ways with Bernardo Gutierrez
July 7 The Budget
The Absurdity of Yachai
An Assessment of the FLOK process & Why the P2P
Foundation will not use the FLOK brand in the future
Finally, on July 27 on the P2P List
My Closing Comments for Michel
p. 3!
p. 7
p. 8
p. 9
p.11
p.15
p.16
p.21
p.25
p.28
p.29
p.31
p.40
p.44
This is Part 2 of the September October 2014 COOK Report.
Part 1 The Netherlands eScience Center Enabling the Human Component of a National e-Infrastructure is published today as a separate
pdf.
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 2
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
Executive Summary
The FLOK Denouement
The FLOK could have shown us a way to defend ourselves from the ongoing destruction of
constitutional governments that have the genuine support of the people who live in nation
states ruled by them. This opportunity is gone and indeed it was likely never there because as the previous July August COOK Report has shown, the FLOK, that was presented
to the world, was a lie. How bad a lie is demonstrated is this final report which is intended
to make public as much information as I can find while the group that gathered around
Daniel Vasquez fights over the scraps gathered under the pretense that there is a viable
FLOK brand. The intent appears to me at least to first and foremost feed its organizers
rather than make a shred of difference in the lives or ordinary Latin Americans.
The FLOK, in its initial clothing, ended in chaos as Michelle Bauwens flew back to Thailand
on June 30 still owed 2.5 months salary. Just before he left he published a very short
evaluation -- critical but certainly friendly and without too many negative details at all. For
this he was brutally attacked by Bernardo Gutiérrez who also trashed the work of Daniel
Arraya and Janice Figueiredo as well as that of Michel.
Michel had announced that he was preparing an evaluative essay on "Hacker Bolchevism,
the paranoid style of politics in p2p” to “critique the non-prefigurative politics that were
so characteristic of the FLOK internal process.” Good. It seemed that Michel would put all
his cards on the table.
As he wrote “The truth is that the FLOK attempted to create a mythology of success,
and of political and social support that wasn't there, and that Bernardo's highly
stage-managed twitter storms were part of that effort. The very reason that BG is
attempting to suppress an evaluation of the FLOK, is that it endangered potential
backroom deals.”
Bauwens continued “And further I was subjected to public threats to publish private
emails in order to discourage any independent evaluation, which is what prompted to add
this specific paragraph about the internal workings of the FLOK process. Engagements to
third parties were routinely changed and unilaterally adapted created all kinds of
embarrassments towards those parties and endangering our trust and reputational capital.
There was a regular use of private and public intimidation, including a threat of
physical intimidation during the very summit, including against members of the
research team to discourage them from sharing their point of view on the public
discussion list.”
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 3
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
Having Promised a Full Report Michel Backs Down
But Michel, saying he would not back down, eventually did just that. COOK
Report: On July 15 I received an assessment of Ecuador from Michel dated July 17th for
publication in the p2p blog on that DAY. When the day came and went with no appearance
I wrote Michel who responded,
Bauwens: Hi Gordon, We decided not to publish it after a internal meeting of
p2p-f ... the reason is that there is too much backlash and negative energy
developing and we decided that it was taking time away from our constructive
pursuits ... when we argue for a political assessment, they respond with threats .. they
are not important enough for spending all our time on this.
COOK Report: My complaint with you at this point is that you apparently won't defend
yourself any further and you try to cloak your decision behind the shadow of a collective
request of the "core p2p group" and sorry I don't know what such a group is.
This collective request will likely turn out to be the most important action ever undertaken
in the entire history of the organization that you have dedicated your life to building.
Surely you will be more transparent about who the members are and the nature of the
request…apparently it was thought not capitulating would stand in the way of other more
important p2p work. Hope that is not the first step down the slippery slope of the end
justifying the means.
You need to publish the evaluation because you announced it, as a matter of self
defense, while under heavy attack, and claiming at the time that you would not
be intimidated.
Not only that, but after the mess, everybody is waiting for
closure. If you don't provide close and you are not doing so then the rumor mills
will be in full control. Not only of flok but also of your reputation.
If you don't take that final step, the psychopaths will stand at attention and feel their
power, and keep bullying everybody until someone else will confront them at some point
in the future, take the heat, and eventually shut their big mouths. The final and most
disastrous option is to capitulate as you area now very conveniently doing. You even have
an excuse. It was not my decision it was that of the core group. And then you will find
that you enter another loop as you await the next attack. Abandoning now will give them
the impression that "they won". Abandoning your solemn word will also raise the question
of whether people should trust you in the future.
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 4
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
The Decision to Capitulate Made by P2P Core Group - the
Identity of Which is Available only to those with a “Need to
Know”
But on July 28 Bauwens: Gordon, I am now also no longer responding to this controversy
and the prods coming from you here.
As I said, I regret to be the focus of your open
letter, as the only person who actually challenged their practices publicly, rather than the
focus on the do-ers of the deeds.
COOK Report: So lets see what Michel is saying: I think you know all you need to
know. SO P2P which pre FLOK was transparent, ends with secrecy based on the
“need to know.” Michel violates the pledges he made to his community and
when asked for an explanation resorts to obfuscation. Since the identity of the
core members is now thanks to FLOK a secret, I must result to speculation.
I find it appaling that Michel would do this.
He does say BG has systematically
targetted my associations, threatening to 'bring me down', promising a
bombshell, and trying to wean them away from the network promising juicy flok
contracts ... this is just the way they operate, and none of us is going to change that ..
Here I absolutely focus on the “doers of the deeds” as Michel says above. On July 3rd and
July 4th two long emails from Michel showed up in my in box. They were cc’ed to roughly
12 P2P related and FLOK related individuals. I was NOT on the cc list. Therefore I can
only conclude that Michel bcc’ed the two emails to me. They are directed to Bernardo
Guiterriz and they provide fascinating detail about Michel’s experience - detail that very
likely would have been in Michel’s open evaluation had he completed one. Consider my
publication of them to be a proxy for the FULL evaluation that Michel promised but never
completed. Michel knows me very well and putting this material in my hands was cetainly
the best way to ensure that it saw the light of day. In early March from the depths of
darkness Michel enbcouraged me to publish about the problems he encountered. At that
time, not knowing the flimsy foundation for the project and all the other details that I
uncovered in May, I declined. The key details just referred to as written by Michel are
found on pages 17 -20 below.
Out of a Desire to Do Good Michel Gets Burned and Then
Capitulates to his Tormentors in Order that Yet another NGO
Can Fufill its Mission
Editor’s Comment: Michel moved to Ecuador with no income other than what Daniel was
willing to pay him.
Then, after returning home, when the threats from Ecuador
continued, Michel decided against publication of his detailed evaluation offering the very
troubling explanation that he has done it at the request of a “p2p core group” - the
members of which he refuses to identify. Thus he has the worst of all worlds. The
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 5
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
introduction of secrecy into p2p overnance and forcing both his friends and enemies to
speculate as to what happened -- especially what happened when at the end of July
threats were made to destroy him.
COOK Report: Sadly you needed money to pay you rent and buy food to eat and by now
your familiy had joined you, so with Daniel controlling whether you would be paid or not
you had little choice but to in effect say ‘yes sir’. No wonder you speak of PTSD.
There are other issues of serious omission. By January when Bethany’s Newsweek article
came out and she was safely back in Canada, not saying what had happened to her and
not saying much of anything about Correa’s treatment of his indigenous people, was really
bad. I was angry when I realized that you had to have known about this sort of thing and
remained silent. But now its clear that, perhaps you had little choice because, if you
angered Daniel, he simply would withhold your pay. And not just pay - what
about the ticket home for you and your family? Although perhaps your ticket was
assured and you were just reluctant to criticise the president whose favor you desired?
We will I suppose never know the truth given that you have invented a reason to violate
the pledge of full disclosure you gave to your own community.
But in my opinion, the fact that your fellow commoners have been successfully
abused to the point where, rather putting all cards on the table, you offer them what is in
efect a white flag does not bode well. But again are they being abused by Daniel Vazquez
and Bernardo or are they merely ALL of them fighting each of for control of
alleged FLOK monetary contracts? It seems that thanks to your capitulation we shall
never know. Now as a you put it I now know all I need to know. OK the P2P is divided
in two: those who know: who won and who lost and the rest of us who have no
need to know the foregoing..
My hope here is that I and like minded others can put enough evidence in the public
domain about “flok management” and its associates so that ANYONE they approach in
future will understand the absolute neccessity of asking very serious questions. They
seem to be kidding themselves that they have a viable “brand” - when the reality is that
anyone who is approached by them had better run in the other direction. Why? Because
pledges made might be kept or we may find out that they were like Bernardo’s guerrila
theater. Made to be broken.
That’s all. Over and out. I truly wish you more success - next time.
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 6
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
Ecuador:
The very Strange End of the FLOK
As the world reels onward, a very critical question will become what will the fate of the
peoples caught under the heel of global capitalism be they of the Palestinians in Gaza or
the peasants of the Ukraine. We had better hope the outcome is not that of Gaza or the
Ukraine. A decade ago Michel Bauwens, in becoming the curator for the global peer to
peer movement, focused on himself the spot light of opposition to the entrenched interests of “global capitalism” -- something that has been a great boon for the most wealthy
.01 percent of humanity while it slowly destroys the rest of us. In his work Michel has focused on non violent change and his Ecuadoran documents present a plausible case of
how, if conditions were right, a state like Ecuador could be transitioned to an economy
based on mutually shared commons.
But when Michel flew to Quito last September and leapt into the arms of Daniel Vasquez
he was stepping onto unchartered territory. He was no longer the head monk in the P2P
monastery curating the P2P wiki but was becoming the author of a program designed to
change the basic structure of a nation state of some 15 million people. This was a step
into a potential revolution where some would win and others would loose. The knives
came out. Michel stayed in Quito until the end of June and then managed to fly back to
Thailand. The Ecuadoran Bolsheviks - Daniel, Xabier and Bernardo determined that they
would write and control the history of what had happened. Truth and Michel be damned.
Michel had promised to write an assessment. He did. This act infuriated them. He promised a longer and more detailed assessment that he produced on July 15 for publication on
the 17th and after more threats another version on for publication on the 19th. Meanwhile
on the 18th some kind of a meeting took place and it seems that Michel has capitulated to
the threats and intimidation of the Latin Bosheviks. A true shame. But I have my own
track record to stand on, and I will not be intimidated by anyone, and publish here the
material some public - some private that has come into my possession.
I have a great deal of information and can only trust that the Correa regime will take a
very close look and the Ecuadoran funds these Spaniards spent before doing anything further with the tarnished and sullied name of FLOK on it and if activists else wherein Latin
America or on the iberian peninsula hear the FLOK siren song. I hope they will not be deceived. Nevertheless - At the end Michel Bauwens did what he swore he would not do and
gave away his freedom of speech of evaluation to protect the business model of the full
time professional activists who care far more about their own glory that helping ordinary
people.
Let’s begin a review of the material. I wrote the following as a response to Andreas Wittel
on Bauwens’ p2p list on July 7.
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 7
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
Background -- The Operation and Mission of the P2P
Foundation
Hi Andreas, I published two issues in 2010 on the P2P Foundation. The first was August
and the second October. They should be easy to find. I think they are even on the P2P
wiki. From that work I have a pretty good idea of what Michel was doing up to that point
in time. Namely he was gathering collecting and curating on a global basis a very diverse
swath of ideas of how to reform an out-of-control global capitalism that was
leading to a new feudalism. He was doing such an amazing job that in my opinion he
became a target for the forces determined to maintain the status quo. Why? Because his
work was showing the world that there were many people who were disillusioned and
were developing ideas to replace the ruling order with something better.
In 2012 the huge global carrier Orange funded him to develop a handbook summarizing
the ideas under his curation. But that was quickly followed by the attack of Franco
Iacomella. And it was less than 10 days after the “disassociation” with Iacomella was
announced in August 2013, that Daniel Vasquez summoned Michelle to Quito to "remake"
the entire Ecuadorian nation state.
He went and evidently did not even meet Carlos Prieto the Spanish rector of IAEN and
budgetary authority for the $700,000 that Daniel claimed was allotted to the project. He
had a teleconference with Carlos where Carlos presumably backed up whatever it was that
Daniel was telling him. Did Michel do any due diligence on Carlos and Renee Ramirez? He
has told me that he did not. He felt he could trust these people and that it was not
necessary.
But if he had investigated, he would have picked up warning signs from the Quito
newspapers of the huge rift that was building between Carlos at IAEN and Ramirez at
Senesyct. The Canadian, Bethany Horne. had just appeared on the scene and signed on
as FLOK’s media representative. From what I can tell Bethany was and is an honest and
hard-hitting journalist. And for sure, once I read her Newsweek story that appeared in
early January 2014 and started studying her links on the web I found a treasure trove of
data that bore out the details of Correa’s borrowing from China as well as material from
Amazon Watch -- data that shows how the current President has sold out his country's
future and is included in my July – August COOK Report.
http://www.cookreport.com/pdfs/July-augCRecuadorfinal.pdf
I have been sent too much material that documents Daniel Vasquez's total control over
everything. And one of the most helpful pieces of information just came from Michel to
this list on the issue of the budget. Andres Delgado, Ron a young Ecuadoran physician,
who out of idealism quit his job to join the project, tried to obtain budgetary
transparency. That seems not to have been possible. If 26 signatures were required to
obtain approval for spending money, one wonders how contrary to what Daniel was telling
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 8
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
Michel, the president's office became aware of the project only the weekend before the
summit. We will probably never know. We do know that Daniel has Aalabs, a free or
open source software company and some kind of foundation associated with it. Instead of
speculation at this point one can only say that one would hope the Correa administration
would insist on and publish an audit of FLOK expenses.
What has become clear in the information shared with me is that what Michel refers to as
“flock management” is one person Daniel Vasquez and he alone. The "BOSS".
There is a lot of confirming data on this in the July Augusrt COOK Report that I
published about seven weeks ago. And I am getting more all the time. Including a very
amusing description of the lengths to which Daniel went to intercept Michel in March when
it seemed that he would have an actual meeting with Ramirez. It seems that, above all,
Vasquez was intent on preventing the meeting taking place. Apparently from the very
beginning, Daniel placed Michel in a protective cocoon telling him – “this person” can be
trusted or “that person cannot”. Why? “Beacuse he is a liar.” Daniel very skillfully built a
wall around Michel to isolate him from the country and people whom he was seeking to
understand and help.
But with that last phrase "help" I think Andreas that we get to the critical issue on which
you were focusing. [Andreas Wittel is a researcher at a UK university whose post I was
answering.] Who gets to define what help is or the conditions under which it
should be offered? Throughout the history of the last two centuries at least, if not more,
this is a question most always faced by movements that proclaimed they want to help the
people against an oppressive government.
In my opinion Michel is trying to hold onto naïve idealism in the hope that something can
be salvaged. But given the completely unpredictable behavior of these people and their
utter lack of trustworthiness plus the cesspool of debt that Correa has built up in the last
five years, the possibility of any good coming from whatever seeds were sown by Flok is
remote.
Some American Persepectives
I look at the USA and see the similar issues. The government of the United States is now
a government not by, and of, and for the people. Rather it is the government of the banks.
A year and a half ago I concluded that with Obama firmly in the hands of Wall Street.
communities would have to build their own networks. And I have seen since then, that, to
an extent, this is possible
However, I've had a very naïve point of view that if they just did that, that somehow
things would turn out okay. Now, the question in my mind is far deeper of course
than just a network. It is when you have the network, what will you do with it? A
year ago in Catalonia Isaac and I had a wonderful introduction to guifi.net. But we never
really got to speak to any end-user's in order to find out what it had enabled, let alone
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 9
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
whether the users had any ideas about the practicality of using it to unite against the
Spanish government's austerity policies. In fact it was pointed out that guifinet’s policies
were strict Neutrality.
I suspect that the most important learning from Ecuador is that the idea of transforming
an entire nation state into the abstract idealized nirvana of a commons is sheer lunacy.
Especially when you walk in at the last movement and are sold a bill goods by DV
who then uses you as a front to achieve his own ends. Daniel knows what the
score is in Ecuador. Are we to believe that the President’s office would give him a penny
to support policies that are aimed and anything other than more of the same - namely the
eradication of its indigenous people in the name of the extraction of oil and copper. Oh
yes Ecuador has an advanced constitution. Only problem is whenever Correa feels a
need, he is allowed to tell the Assembly that there is national emergency and the rights of
nature in the constitution are summarily removed … simple as that.
Looking at the USA I had a naïve hope that if you just bring Internet access to enough
poor people who could not afford Google fiber, some how you would get a brilliant person
in emerging from the shadows who, knowing how to use the appropriate databases, would
find out where the wealth was in Kansas City and having found out would show their
neighbors what the problem was. Now that is possible but before anything like that has a
prayer of happening there are a huge amount of other tasks needing to be done. And
these tasks can only be done by an alliance of Kansas Cityians working together on the
ground day after day and week after week.
I learned a bunch of important stuff that I will be writing about that I never could have
learned without my visit. Among the “learnings” are the importance of building a staff of
volunteers who will guide users at the open computer centers along a path of discovery
that will take them from using tools like Wikipedia to get entries on things like redlining
and gerrymandering, then take them on to tools of basic economic literacy to avoid
payday lenders and deceptive bank loans to greater awareness for example of the work of
a member of Economics Department of the University who is forming a credit union. And
from there you make available and handing out some of the studies on financial problems
done by the Occupy Wall Street working groups. I learned a few other things that I had
been naïve about. In particular how a vibrant black community in what Anita Dixon of the
Mutual Musicians Foundation calls the Three Square Miles was taken apart and hollowed
out by real estate developers and their political allies in Washington in the 50 years after
World War II.
I did achieve, with help from my local hosts, two meetings with the University of Missouri
Kansas City Department of Economics which ironically is the most radical in the United
States. The first meeting included the department’s expert on local economic
development, by and for the inhabitants rather than for outside corporations and Whitney
Terrell a member of the literature department who in Kansas City in 2005 published The
King of Kings County, a fictionalized account of the organized rape of Kansas City's poor
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 10
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
people by the developers.
The second meeting included Bill Black who, in working for the US Department of Justice
between 1988 and 92 obtained indictments against more than 1000 bankers and sent
more than 100 to prison in the savings-and-loan crisis. Now it is possible that if the
Economics Department works with the Kansas City Freedom Network builders that in two
or three years they will have enough infrastructure built out and enough users so that, by
year three or four, the chances of being able to deliver tools into the hands of local
residents who want to take their own fate under their own control to the limited extent
that may be possible by then, may have a small chance of becoming reality.
The point is that having written about Kansas City from a distance for year and now
having spent eight full days there in person on the ground I have acquired at least a
pretty decent beginning foundational understanding of the enormity of the task.
Meanwhile last September in Ecuador, Vazquez presented Michel with a candy store and
mesmerizing him, hooked him, and then when he had him on the scene, he effectively
could control him with the threat not to pay. Nevertheless I must confess that the
opportunity seemed so alluring that if I were in Michel's shoes last September i likely
would have done the same.
Here is the new primary source material.
I have marked the most
significant material in red and the next most in blue with the remainder in
black.
What Happened
On June 26th from Michel Bauwens: quote:
Again, no we didn't do due diligence, and we don't have the means to do so, we relied on
promises of whom we thought were reputable persons; both the spanish hackers and the
rector had substantial positive reputations, or so we thought at the time; we had no
reason to doubt them
So again a summary
Though we didn't know all the ins and out, we were aware very early on, say January, that
there was a conflict, but this didn't concern us too much
By March it had escalated to defunding, blocking of our wages, and it became our
concern; I made it public and threatened to leave unless a solution was found; and two
days later, a solution was found and we were refunded and a solution was found for our
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 11
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
wages (and the rector was sacked)
Starting in March, it became clear that though we had formal support and funding, there
was no deep support and commitment, at least from Ramirez; but we didn't discover until
late May that the President was unaware of the project and that Guillaume Long blocked
the cooperation of his staff. Until the end of May, the Flok mgt kept telling us there was
such support and commitment; and that there would be a convenio at the end of the
summit, with legislative projects and one funded pilot per table, and even the promise to
extend the pilot projects to the whole country. It was only 2 days before the summit that
we were informed this was not the case.
In any case, as of March we pretty much knew that it was a problematic project, but by
then we were not just working for the global community anymore, reason enough to have
undertaken and continue the project, but engaged with local communities. It would not
have been responsible to leave them out in the cold without trying to get the maximum
out of the project.
I still do not regret to have continued, and I am not aware of any researcher who regrets
it; but of course we regret the lack of commitment, and the disinformation we received,
and the fact that the Ecuadorian people will not substantially benefit from the work. None
of us will be leaving without a bad taste.
But this is not an entire failure in the greater global context. The first transition plan
towards the commons has been written, and may other locales are contacting us for new
projects in the same vein (I'm talking to six of them). We have learned some lessons here
about how not to do it [in future] and with whom not to work,
And on June 27 from Michel Bauwens
Dear Cristina, and others,
thanks for your letter, which I read through google translate,
you will have noticed that I never called you nor Hellekin trolls, nor anyone else.
There are several issues:
1) we all know that the flok mgt people are not trustworthly, not just marginally, but
radically, their modus operandi are lies, deceit and disinformation. [Editor:Again through
written in the plural Michel refers to Daniel Vazquez, a single individual.]
2) because of this: I and many others indeed did believe it was a strategic transition
project, supported by the govt, this was not the case, we were deceived as are many
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 12
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
others
3) because of this, when I
that you and hellekin were
from the outside ... it only
on my part, and I'm sorry I
still trusted them in the very beginning, I was led to believe
negative people who just attached the project and its people
gradually dawned on me that this was a mistaken impression
judged you in this way, I was wrong
4) I do have one beef, and hope it is not a misrepresentation, that is that the key
communicated critique was that flok was a colonial project, lead by foreigners intent on
imposing their will ; this may be an accurate description of the project mgt, but is the
opposite of the mentality and practice of the research team: I think most of your critique
comes from the encounter with the flok mgt. behaviour, but they are not the flok, just
part of it
5) I come from extremely poor working class family ….. I have been poor myself in
different periods of my life (though western poverty is of course not to be compared), I
live in a country with a lot of poverty, and from 2007 to 2012, lived a very precarious life,
under the poverty line, with chronic ailments and no money (until now in fact), to get any
medical care; ….. [Two omissions on behalf of Michel’s prvacy.]
6) so, I do have solidarity and sympathy with poor people and in fact it is the only reason
I chose to abandon a normal life and become an activist; the question is of course what to
do about it; it is clear that I believe that the p2p/commons approach, based on liberating
both knowledge and productive resources for every citizen, is key to this; without
changing the mode of production, and therefore the class structure, there is no
fundamental way to tackle poverty; this is exactly what FLOK was meant to do, and why I
came, and we gradually discovered this was not the case
7) once we discovered this, we had two choices, one is to quit, and we nearly did in
March, the other is to make the best of difficult circumstances. I see at least 3 reasons not
to quit: a
a) despite the failures, it remains a historical experience and allowed us to craft and
ameliorate proposals and strategies for commons transition, this is a historical first, and
creates its own dynamic, and the possibility to do genuine flok processes (likely under
another name) in other locales , and without the deception
b) local groups and lower level officials did get motivated to use the flok as well, for
example the mayor and assembly of the people of Sigchos were we got three standing
ovations for explaining the potential of open agricultural machining and microfactories to
help solve the farming questions (there are others projects like this for nearly every other
researchers); all these people are very aware of the dubiousness of the Flok process 'as
is', but trust the researchers and the networks we are working with, which are global
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 13
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
networks that share the same basic values
c) the wishes, hopes, desires and difficulties of the research team, all of home have
abandoned other engagements and made sizeable sacrifices to come here, and didn't not
want to accept defeat. Most of us are still dealing with huge financial messes due to the
non-payment of half of our income, and working for flok under the conditions of
permanent deceit deeply affected our psychic well-being. Personally, I truly feel like I
have post-traumatic stress disorder, you have simply no idea how much grief we
faced nearly every day, if you have to work in a zero-trust environment in which
you cannot rely on any engagement and have to constantly hedge your
behaviour. This is worse than any dysfunctional corporate environment you can
imagine
My assessment is still that on a local scale, FLOK will turn out to very disappointing (and
has already majorly disappointed), but will lead to modest initiatives, and that is indeed a
betrayal of the hopes, and as you say, of the poor (but bear in mind that no government
has done more for the poor than this one, despite all its problems and issues); it is
precisely the indigenous people critical of the government that were most forthcoming in
their backing and enthusiasm; bear in mind that Sigchos is 70% indigenous and that their
assembly of the people was nearly 90% so; and that our paper on traditional knowledge
was written exclusively by indigenous scholars (they even refuse to cite western scholars),
who are critical of the government. We have received many positive reviews and reactions
to their people, including even yesterday from the Fundacion Indigena.
But the global scale, I think this is were our decision to continue will be vindicated. I am
already talking to at least six potential locales, including a very radical and growing
anarcho-syndicalist cooperative in Catalonia, who want to do with us a state-less and
govt-less flok project there. In this global context, flok will have had the role of a catalyst,
speeding up transition and transformation processes. My view is that this makes it worth
staying the course in the face of the adversity we faced.
Of course, we can disagree, but outside of the type of transition towards shared
knowledge and productive resources, there is little fundamental hope for poverty; the
relative success of this government is done at the expense of long-term sustainability and
ecological survival and inserts them into destructive consumptive patterns. And the old
left-statism is no longer the answer either. Globa-local commons oriented productive
communities are the solution we strive for, and will continue to do so.
On June 29 Bauwens
I'm leaving tomorrow and will be flying home for nearly two days, arriving July 2 in the
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 14
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
thai afternoon, with need to be with my family and a huge backlog .. so I many not
answer so fast in the coming days,
This is the first 'informal' assessment that I just published on flok:
Dear friends, I am leaving Ecuador tomorrow after a rich but difficult experience with
many up and downs ... (one of the downs being is that we are leaving the country with
still 2.5 months of salary due); though the summit was a success in terms of its own
dynamic, we discovered that the president of the country didn't even know of the
existence of the FLOK, and the one of our funding ministers even blocked his officials of
attending until one day before the summit .. 15 attempts to talk with our two funding
ministers about a supposedly strategic effort went unheeded .. nevertheless, there are
also good sides: one is that lower level officials, those that feel the need to remain faithful
to the ideals of the civic revolution, are enthusiastic and are working on pilot projects; the
other is a number of civic movements intent on continuing the effort such as our friends
at Diabluma and the associated rural-urban coalition; amongst the most inspiring efforts
is that of Mario Andino, the mayor of Sigchos, the third poorest district in Ecuador, who
just bought a 2,200 ha. domain to experiment with open agriculture, and that is at least
partially a direct result of our interventions, this will happen with our without the
government ... and then we leave a cultural and political legacy in terms of the ideas;
here is a sample reaction that I received, and that makes me very happy:
".I know you have had good and bad moments here, but I truly believe that you leave a
relevant and unforgettable way of thinking in my community. I personally have seen how
my vision of reality has changed based on your ideas, knowledge and will to change
things...Farewell my friend...I´m sure that wherever you go, you will make the difference
that humanity desperately needs... "
Then of course there is the legacy of the flok as the first ever effort to craft a integrated
commons transition program, legitimized even if imperfectly supported by a nation state,
which makes it a geo-political event; we are already talking with a large cooperative
group, 2-3 cities, and a rural hub elsewhere in the world, to do local flok processes; and
the flok as a open and participatory method to craft policy, which is getting interest from
other governments in the region ..
So this is life, sometimes we do a seeming huge step forwards, only to fall back, and even
as we may be disappointing in the short term, we have planted a seed that may bear
more fruit than we expected later on
Goodbye to Ecuador then, or perhaps just hasta luego, as it is a most spectacular country
... let the hundred flowers bloom, here and elsewhere in the world, we certainly would
love to return to Sigchos and help the mayor, the assembly of the people and the
population as a model locale for commons-oriented practices and transitions. After all, it is
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 15
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
a mini-Ecuador with four climate zones.
With thanks of all the flok team members, volunteers, and the local citizens who
supported us; special mention to Fabien and his team at Alliana Solidaria, the most
inspiring project so far,
July 3rd Here it Gets Truly Bizarre. What follows
is a response to Bernardos’ attack on Michel’s
just cited informal evaluation
From: Michel Bauwens <michel@p2pfounda9on.net>
Subject: **JUNK** Re: Chile and Greece
Date: July 3, 2014 11:56:52 PM EDT
To: Bernardo Gu9érrez <bernardobrasil@gmail.com>
Cc: Eimhin David ShorX <involuteconduit@gmail.com>, Vasilis Kostakis <kostakis.b@gmail.com>, Layne Hartsell <hartsellml@p2pfounda9on.net>, Vinicius Braz Rocha <vr.self.media@gmail.com>, Chris Gio9tsas <chrisgiot87@gmail.com>, Victor Valenzuela <victoroshw@gmail.com>, George Papanikolaou <georgepapani@gmail.com>, Dimitris <dimitris@tolabaki.gr>, Pablo Troncoso <langtronk@gmail.com>, george dafermos <georgedafermos@gmail.com>, Stacco Troncoso <staccotroncoso@gmail.com>, Vasilis Niaros <vasilis.niaros@gmail.com>
[Editors Note: My apologies for republishing what some will call private mail although
one has to wonder how private the above is after it has gone to a CC list of 12 people. As
I said in my comment to Michel, the last thing the FLOK managemenrt wants to see is the
light of any kind transparency. It shines day lighton what these people attempted to get
away with in a dark alley. I sent him a draft of this and to his credit he replied that while
he disliked the publication of private mail, he could see that it might be justified by the
need for transparency as to what had happened.]
Bauwens: Dear Bernardo, there are a lot of things I do wrong, and I make mistakes, but
this is not the discussion here. The discussion here is a profound difference in approach to
p2p development. The question is whether p2p politics should be prefigurative, or if
[whether] you can manipulate your way into power through some kind of hacker
bolshevism.
By the way, before I proceed, you may think that I didn't respond to your facebook threat
because of the private email thing, but this is not the right interpretation. In fact, I
wanted to avoid the process that is going on right here, and avoid embarassment both to
ourselves (you and me) and the flok team in Quito. What I wanted and hoped for, apart
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 16
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
from giving my evaluation of the process, was to start a political dialogue. Instead you go
for the personal attacks. I do not write anything in private emails that cannot see the light
of the day, nevertheless, you would do well to think twice, because there is an issue of
privacy, and private emails are by definition involving other people. So my take is that this
will hurt you more than me. It is a serious breach of etiquette.
I will tell you here about the landmark moment that made me understand the logic of the
flok mgt approach. I am not a prude, this means that even if I witnessed the intimidation,
broken promises etc ... that I mentioned before, it was not the pivot. People are
imperfect, so is DV , myself and you, under stress, and this project had immense stress,
so that if people resort to violent communication, is something I don't like, but I can get
over it. It is only when I understood it was systemic that it became a problem.
In early April, [Editor: judging by other events that are on the recordthis could only have
been early March.] as I was trying to gauge the political support of the project and
considered leaving, none of us had been paid for three months, except DV who has his
own basic income from his cultural foundation, and we had learned our budget had
been finally cut, it was a 'now or never moment'. After a number of cancelled meetings
with Ramirez, I was finally about meet him. Somehow, Daniel had learned about this, and
was rushing to SENESCYT to avoid that I would have such a meeting on my own. While in
the taxi he called me. I explained that I needed this man to man talk to gauge the
political support. He told me then: you can never talk with him like that, everything he
says will be false and political, so you have to respond in kind, and I know you can't do
that.
To me that was the nutshell of the machiavellic thinking that inspires DV. He's operating in
a world of 100% evil people, whom you can't approach as humans at all. This is why
everything has to be controlled and managed by him, why he doesn't want anyone else,
not me, not diabluma, no one, to interfere with the control and mgt of the project. But
there is a difference with genuine machiavellism: you need troops, and there are no
troops. This strategy of mutual manipulation can't work, if you are facing a state, and you
have no social basis. Even if it would work, if you win on the terms of the so-called
enemy, you have not one a p2p victory, but a phyrric one. So this was a pivotal
moment, in which I realized I had no agency, that everything was controlled,
that lines of communication, budgets, decisions about whom to invite or not, the
facilitation process of the cumbre, everything was to be decided by just one
person.
The second mistake was how you treat your troops. You need the trust of your troops. But
if you blatantly and repeatedly deceive your troops, this strategy can't work. So the
deception to make us work ('to save carlos' job', after he had already been fired and our
budget cut), this fatal decision that forced us to move from a stacked publication that
allowed for deep participation, to a rushed off job ; the repeated change of committments
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 17
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
to third parties, which profoundly affects reputation capital in networks, the broken
promises and disinfo campaign around Gordon ), intimidations and threats of censorship
against dissenting voices, all this suddenly made sense as part of a pattern.
We were just pawns in this tactical game. Again there is a long history of such behaviour,
which may win battles if not wars, but if you profoundly alienate your troops, you are
going to pay the price. And it is what happened. I have no doubt that DV occasionally
speaks the truth but I just don't know when, and so we have to take everything he says
with circumspection. In 15 years of p2p work, I have never had to do this internally in the
network, we have conflicts, but they are mostly wysiwig, they are not calculated. They are
genuine conflicts, unavoidable, but they do not arise, at least until now, because of some
Machiavellian strategy.
Every decision was tainted by this. The change in agreement with our authors, the broken
promise with Gordon, DV clearly admitted there was no compulsion to do this, it was just
another tactical decision, to get another person to summit.
Winning at all costs, centralizing and controlling all resources, managing
perception and communications, in my view, they are the antithesis of the p2p
culture. So what we are facing here is not just an accident, it's a particular kind
of hacker bolshevism, the end justifies the means; if you have to deceive
someone to make an advance, you do it, and you'll deal with the consequences
later. I am not so naive that I claim these things don't work, they do, sometimes
and occasionally.
So I woke up that day, to the kind of game we were playing, and lost trust in the
leadership of the project. That same day, I got a phone call from an assistant of Ramirez,
the intent was at the same time to cancel the meeting and trying to ascertain why I was
there. What was clear then and there, was that this assistant did not really know we were
working for the flok, he asked my name, how long I would be staying in Ecuador, and his
questions indicated a confusion between flok and wiki coesc ...
And I don't know what DV and RR talk about when they met, I don't know why
the Senescyt official told me I had 'deblocked' the project back in
october/november. Frankly, I don't know anything. And this is the point: all that
knowledge is centralized, privatized, controlled, it is the antithesis of a
participatory project, of internal cooperation.
How is it that you, who criminalizes and demonizes Fora do Eixo for allegedly authoritarian
practices, find nothing to say about a project that in my experience, was worse? If you
keep accusing people even when receiving corrected information, how can I trust your
judgment about FdO ? Do they really routinely issue death threats to you and others, is
that really proven ? Or is it of the same order of "Gordon Cook doesn't exist, he is a front
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 18
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
for Robert Steele, he's a CIA agent, he wrote a paper full of adolescent rants (just as you
consider my own evaluation 'childish' and ' making noise' and 'talking shit' ? This stopped
me looking at his paper for 6 weeks, until I finally checked it, and made it into a readable
20 p. paper after half afternoon of editing. He is crazy, he is a neocon. Andres Delgado,
who from the very beginning, was he really a spy from Senescyt ? Do you have any proof
of this ?
Here is how I see things. DV means well, but he's over is head. Instead of opening up the
process, he believes he has to control everything, because this is 'how the enemy works'.
Here is the scenario:
"The process doesn't advance as he thinks it should. Then suddenly, it dawns on him, it's
a communication problem, it's Bethany Horne’s doing, she can't communicate, she's a
troublemaker. She has to go out. He was right, because, see, she wrote a critical article
about the govt, she must be on the payroll of one of these US Foundations, that explains
everything.
So, we go on, but the problem does not disappear .. oh my God, of course, it is Andres
Delgado, he talked with a Senescyt official without asking permission and even appeared
in public ... he must be a spy from Senescyt. That is why things went wrong, you can't
trust AD , He even tried to create a proper administrative process for the funding, taking
it from my control, oh my god, this has to stop, he has to go.
And still, things don't go as expected .... It must be the research team, oh, have you
noticed, Janice F, instead of being fully supportive, is critiquing some of my decisions, in
public!! This has to stop, I'll give her one chance. Who does she think she is to just air her
differences on the public mailing list!! It worked, she kept quiet. I' m a good manager, this
is the way to go!! And while we're at it, let's do the same with all these other trolls, GD,
Q, and others, all these negative people who are infecting the mailing list, they are trolls,
trouble makers, they destroy the image of FLOK. Let's put someone in charge of
moderating their comments, we don't want to give the wrong impression to people
outside, god forbids they would think not all is going well with FLOK. They are
endangering our image.
Michel Bauwens is really annoying as well, but damn, with this guys' network and
reputation, we can't touch him for now. Things are not going well, still, ah of course, it's
the communication team !! Why did we hire business people for this, they don't get it at
all. Let's get Bernado Guitarez, in no time we'll be twitter trending and build a positive
image. See how participatory we are, we did it, we are trending, on social media!!! People
love us, they participate in spreading the message."
Really, is that how a open and participatory process is supposed to work, Is that why the
research team is centralized and non-participatory, but the true hacker leadership, is
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 19
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
watching out to protect the purity of the participatory project ???
I am not blaming DV's weaknesses and frailties, what I'm blaming is that these
weaknesses have become the internal management process. I'm not blaming that
someone loses his or her temper occasionaly. What I see is that it is <the> system, and I
didn't expect it.
"And now the finale, it's clear that GL [Guiliame Long the rector of IAEN] and especially
Renee Ramirez betrayed us, but see, now that the President knows about it and reacted
enthusiasticially, it's going to happen, finally, we're on the way to victory ...
Euh what, Michel Bauwens is writing an open evaluation, he's talking about the
things that went wrong. He's going to endanger the final victory .. let's have BG
deal with that irruption of critical thought, let's have him threaten to publish
private and confidential emails, that will do the trick!! Let's do a proper FdO job
on MB ..."
You know what Bernardo Guitarez, I advise you against it, though it may give you a
convenient excuse of why things went wrong, personal attacks may damage me, but they
will also damage you and the remaining chances of the FLOK.
Deal with it politically, by political analysis, don't do the Tea Party thing of attacking
persons and their flaws, go for the ideas and why they are right or wrong,
Is DV really aware that you are trying to foment an open war ? I think he will advise
against it, you have nothing to win, and everything to lose, by trying to intimidate.
I simply gave my opinion, this is my essential role; write your excellent articles and deal
with critique honourably, by answering the arguments. P2P people don't go for the jugular,
but don't think I won't defend myself.
Don't go for hacker bolchevism, go for p2p dialogue. Don't destroy the meagre chances of
accomplishing something with the govt itself in Ecuador.
Michel
July 4th
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 20
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
From: Michel Bauwens <michel@p2pfoundation.net>
Subject: Re: Chile and Greece
Date: July 4, 2014 11:43:00 PM EDT
To: Bernardo Gutiérrez <bernardobrasil@gmail.com>
C c : E i m h i n D a v i d S h o r t t < i nv o l u t e c o n d u i t @ g m a i l . c o m > , Va s i l i s Ko s t a k i s
<kostakis.b@gmail.com>, Layne Hartsell <hartsellml@p2pfoundation.net>, Vinicius Braz
Rocha <vr.self.media@gmail.com>, Chris Giotitsas <chrisgiot87@gmail.com>, Victor
Valenzuela <victoroshw@gmail.com>, George Papanikolaou <georgepapani@gmail.com>,
Dimitris <dimitris@tolabaki.gr>, Pablo Troncoso <langtronk@gmail.com>, george
d a f e r m o s < g e o r g e d a f e r m o s @ g m a i l . c o m > , S t a c c o Tr o n c o s o
<staccotroncoso@gmail.com>, Vasilis Niaros <vasilis.niaros@gmail.com>
thank you BG for this, as I feel it is p2p, because it restores the balance,
Now you're not just thinking of me as a poor sick bastard, but I think the same now of
you .. The sense of superiority is oozing from your letter through every pore, and I find it
absolutely disgusting,
I will not use this space to defend myself, but to defend my friends, whom you are
continuing to defame
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Bernardo Gutiérrez
Dear Michel and all
That is a Gordon Cook work, who published mails and private communication ,violating
laws. If I was the director of the FLOK I would have processed him. But they
(Management Team) don´t want any war. They are quite responsible and will even defend
you, not being happy neither with your work neither with your actitude.
Bauwens: it's a really sick procedure to threaten people and then say it was all a joke. It
was not a joke and you know it very well, you try to intimidate me through threats,
publicly, which is very stupid, and you're now trying to chicken out. This may have worked
had you done it privately, but there are now hundreds of witnesses. You've have been
exposed as the Stalinist bully that you are, live with it.
Gordon never threatened anyone and quoted emails of a public discussion group, which is
an entirely different case. He wrote a really excellent paper, vastly superior to the cheap
crap you call journalism and has communicated for 30 years with an elite group of
telecom reformers which include lawrence lessig, langdon winner,
[ Editor’s note: I do
not count Langdon winner as a telecom reformer.] Vincent Cerf and many many others.
His work on documenting p2p infrastructures has been absolute stellar and I urge
everyone to consult them at the Gordon Cook Report. He has a level of respect and
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 21
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
expertise you can only dream off and it would take you decades to achieve. Gordon was
undergoing a spinal operation, an eye operation, was under medication forcing him. To
abuse an old man weakened by medication, to break promises three times in a row, to
make sure he can't be paid for his work, is absolutely scandalous and despicable, and that
you keep justifying this and malign the victim of dishonesty, shows the kind of morality
you are following.
Bernardo to Michel: Your lack of effort speaking Spanish even a word put you in a quite
small english speaker world in Ecuador, with few fonts, always the same. Eating in
Shopping Malls, with few contact with locals. In "my short time" in Ecuador, I have much
more friends than you. Reclaiming about the food, about cultural life, without diving in
reality. A very bad attitude, I think. But not so important. You can do whatever you want
with your life, food, free time.
Bauwens: really bernardo, this is so ludicrous I can't help to have some reaction ... lots
of efforts to speak Spanish, even gave some lectures exclusively in Spanish which were
quite appreciated, despite my weaknesses in the language ... actually, one of the nicest
aspects of the trip was that so many Ecuadorians appreciated my efforts ... but yes, I
have to apologize to the world, guilty as charged, I did eat a few times in food courts ....
euh, and I guess my 70 meetings with civic organisations, all well documented, are proof
of my disengagement ... that you don't realize how you are discrediting yourself with such
paragraphs, beats me .. so I urge you to continue, they are grist to the mill!!
Bernardo to Michel: The whole world, the whole Brazil, is boycoting any project of this
marketing mafia and you defend it. I saw Sylvie Duran, a quite relevant guest in the
FLOK, attacking you with this question in the Summit. She was outrageous with you, as
many latin american and Brazilians. Defending that mafia and not listening to the whole
feeling against Fora do Eixo, defending them, Michel, speaks everything about you. How
can we trust you, if you defend the worst p2p and commons practices ever? Your
reputation is in danger, in Brazil and Latin american, because of Fora do Eixo. We both,
Vinicius and me, tried to alert you.. .but, no Michel has plans.
My theory is that you what to get your PHP [PhD] from Ivana Bentes in Rio, a person that
shows off in public: "Michel likes us, Fora do Eixo, because I will give him a PHP". it would
be the worthless PHP in history, of course, anybody knows about Ivana. So, go on, my
friend, with your hype cool strategy protecting Fora do Eixo!!
Bauwens: nice Bernardo, I would pray for you to expose yourself, and you are doing it
for free yourself .... everybody here knows that I'm not defending FdO, merely offering
various perspectives on the group. It's all there in the open for everyone to see ... Ivana
Bentes is a great lady, well respected in Brazil, again to a level that will take you 30 years
to achieve. And that you believe I am for sale for a hypothetical PhD, well that says it all
doesn't it, that you believe yourself in this..
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 22
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
Bernardo: There are not one, but many proves, Michel, that Andres is the new Franco
Iacomella in your life. He was not fired, he works for Renè. In many presentations of
Guillaume and Renè he was there without permission of his boss, Daniel. He desrespected
his contract everyday, worked without doing what he was contracted for. Again the same:
your feel happy with English speaking people that flatter you and your emotional
inteligence is so akward that you don´t realise.
Bauwens Andres is a really great person and was a marvelous coordinator. He gave up a
paid scholarship out of idealism. He was trying to create political bridges between
Senescyt and flok, on behalf of all of us, and it is telling of your mentality that you see
this as spying. Like me, he mistook the flok for an open and participatory process and
didin't realize everything had to go through the 'boss'. Have you noticed how many times
you have been defending the hierarchical process in your email ?
He tried to get a formal and open accounting process instead of the private control by one
person, and this got him into final trouble. I'm sure DV did not inform you of this true
state of affairs. It's so much easier to believe he's a spy isn't it, that really fits into your
paranoid worldview
Bernardo You lost you mind, Michel I would never publish a private mail. Neither go to a
communication war.
Bauwens Really, you threaten me publicly and repeatedly and now you say you will never
do it, and it is me who lost my mind for believing you ????
Bernardo I am not quite interested in this, Michel. But who can loose his reputation here
is you, mainly because the research and job you made was not what expected. The work
of Daniel Araya was simply terrible. All his papers were trown to the litter by the
participants of the tables. Open Data defending IBM and capitalism. Culture paper:
terrible, it is being remade. Better not speaking about Janices work: 30.000 dolars,
straign to the rubbish. Just Georges and Restakis made a fantastic works, in the content
and in their actitude.
Bauwens I am actually proud of my work and that of my team, to have under intense
pressure, produced 15 policy papers, who are of course not all of the same value ... Daniel
Araya has so many highly evaluated academic books on his record that I don't know how
to respond to your trashing ... I guess pluralism is indeed a terrible thing for you. Janice
did an excellent job and was the most deeply connected with local people that anyone
else. I predict that, since there is no govt commitment for carrying out the policies, that it
is actually Janice who will have done the most to seed p2p and commons ideas in Ecuador.
You have a really strange sense of respect for your colleagues to spread these kind of
evaluations which will travel through the net.
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 23
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
Bernardo: You say you did not get any input in the Summit? Incredible!
Bauwens: pfff .. can't make out if you are willfully misinterpreting or just plain st..id ? I
gave a positive evaluation of the input of the summit in the very paper you were trying to
suppress, didn't you read it then ? what I said was that the research team was refused
any input in the summit preparation. Even inquiring into the status of our invitees was
seen as interference. This was just part of the hierarchical control mechanism, but since
you think it is proper in a p2p system to have a 'boss' vetting all decisions, I guess we will
leave it at that.
Bernardo: You simply know almost nothing about networks, strange for a person that
tries to seem a guru in this networked era. All the metrics of FLOK are organic, are the
result of an amazing work in list, seminars, meetings in territories. Twitter does not lie.
IAEN offered us an agency to buy followers! I we said not. The only numbers we used in
networks where quality ones, relationship ones. All of them. Saying that our
communication was propaganda (dont make me send the report, with more than 200
news worlwide an thousands of quality references. Is is a shame your accusation, and
show how destructive and resentufl you can be. You should take some lessons in
networks, by the way.
Bauwens yes, I don't know anything about networks, and as you said before, I know
nothing about netiquette. Your entirely stage-managed twitter storms that aim for
superficial trending effects, are entirely p2p. I stand down before the awesomeness of
your expertise, as a well-known know-nothing, universally reviled. And now that you will
stop defending me about all the people who said bad things about me. Things will really
be terrible.
Bernardo Guitarez: About the participatory process of the research -You forget the main point: we created the participaroty process for you. It was a quite
classical and top down research, with some interesting detalis, until febreary. We created
the wiki, we worked in the free software co-ment, we created an open strategy for you. I
created the PAD with the strategy: http://floksociety.org/pad/p/comunicainvestiga You
just did the 30%, but it was good. Researchers did not use networks and understood the
open process. Saying that the only participatory part was the research is a lie. And having
not participated so as expected, you should not show off like that. I have all the metrics of
the whole participatory process. What you dont undestand is that participation happens
without you (and with out me).
Bauwens so the fact that someone else implemented the technical tools make them
participatory, aha .. interesting view. And the researchers knew nothing about networks ?
You really don't realize how painful it is to read such things, about people I have been
working in networks for dozens of years ... and each of us was out not just in the
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 24
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
technical networks but out and about in the streets ... of course, nothing compared to the
highly participatory twitter storms ... you even sent us letters to prevent us from speaking
about things, because 'it's not the right time yet' ..
ok, enough, and as I can see, the others are getting tired of our exchanges,
Michel
Gordon Cook cook@cookreport.com July 4
To: Michel Bauwens <p2pfoundation1@gmail.com>
Ecuador Fwd: [P2P-F] A parting of ways with Bernardo Gutierrez
Security: Signed (cook@cookreport.com)
Bravo Michel!!
I'm preparing an evaluative essay on "Hacker Bolchevism, the paranoid style of politics in
p2p' to critique the non-prefigurative politics that were so characteristic of the FLOK
internal process.
Very eager to see this. Editor’s note - regretabley, as readers will see by July 19th after
further threats from the FLOKISTAS Michel put out a critique that alhough far better than
nothing did not adequately demolish what he ran into in Quito. As Michel explained it by
July 19 his core p2p group asked him to refrain from further hostilities and as a result
what he did complete was aded to the p2p wiki with no public announcement and left out
of the blog. It is conjecture on my part but I believe that the core members who enforced
omerta are very likely the 12 people cc’d in the messages of July 3rd and 4th above.
A Parting of Ways with Bernardo Gutierrez
Begin forwarded message:
From: Michel Bauwens <michel@p2pfoundation.net>
Subject: [P2P-F] A parting of ways with Bernardo Gutierrez
Date: July 4, 2014 10:41:36 PM EDT
To: p2p-foundation <p2p-foundation@lists.ourproject.org>, "P2P Foundation - Lista de
correo en espa&#241, ol" <p2p-lang-es@lists.ourproject.org>
Reply-To: P2P Foundation mailing list <p2p-foundation@lists.ourproject.org>
Apologies that this is in english. (copy to spanish p2p list)
In the last few days, I have been harassed and threatened by Bernardo Gutierrez, who
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 25
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
tried to suppress the publication of an evaluation of the FLOK process, which you can find
here:
http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/a-provisional-informal-assessment-of-the-flok-transition-pr
ocess-in-ecaudor/2014/07/01
In this text, I simply make a political evalution of my 6 months in Ecuador, as I see it, as I
believe was both my right (of free speech), and a duty to the p2p community, who has
been asking for it. It is in my view a moderate and considered political evaluation, though
of course, as my opinion, open to critique and counter-argumentation.
While I would have accepted a conversation asking me to postpone it, in order to
safeguard some potential backroom deal in Ecuador, instead BG thought it would be useful
to publicly threaten the publication of my private emails, thinking this would frighten me.
It doesn't, as I don't believe I write anything in private that can't see the light of the day.
But private email involves other persons and I find it very ethically objectionable that he
would use this as a threat.
This is not the first time, a few months ago, Bernardo tried to suppress any balanced
treatment of Fora do Eixo (http://p2pfoundation.net/Fora_do_Eixo) and even objected to
the mention of Chilean groups that were somehow one day, connected with FdO. BG's
totally unfounded accusation then was that "I defended FdO because I was getting a free
PhD from Ivana Bentes". It gave me a first insight into his unfair mindset. To be clear, I
was not then nor am I now, neither defending nor attacking FdO, but the p2p-f is
conceived as a pluralistic network to show different perspectives on an issue, helping
people make their own decisions. We don't want to be factional and choose one side or
another within the broad p2p community. I found it strange then that Bernardo was
exerting pressure to have only one side of the story seen as legitimate, and refused an
open debate on the merits of the critique. I could only be radically against FdO, no nuance
was permitted.
The second incident came with the aftermath of the FLOK. In the above evaluation, I
avoid studiously to mention or critique internal matters, believing that it would only make
matters worse. But I have had to suffer there the systematic unfounded accusations
against my friends and associates: BG has simply reiterated and continue to spread
unfounded accusations against excellent people I had the opportunity to work with : BT,
AD, GC, the research team , the communication team ... Human conflicts are unavoidable
but this is beyond this, as it was part of a systematic politics of denigration, a paranoid
style of management, in which all faults were always seen to come not just from
'exterior', but always from malicious willfullness. It was a very oppressive working culture
and one that was much worse than any I have experienced in my life to date.
What is worse, even when I sent information to BG advising him not to re-iterate these
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 26
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
accusations based on facts that I provided to him, he would continue spreading them,
totally ignoring the counter-factuals I had sent him. For example, BG has coninued to
spread disinfo about Gordon Cook that he is a neocon, opposed to copyleft, and other
falsehoods, even after receiving documentation to the contrary. That you repeat
accusations from third parties out of ignorance is one thing, but that you persist, even
when you have received proof of the contrary, shows clear ill will.
So to be clear: I will not be intimidated. I will continue to think through, the things that
went rignt and wrong with FLOK. This is my right, and it is my duty.
The main conclusion I can already reveal: P2P politics must be prefigurative. You can't
built a new p2p society, by using methods that are opposed to it. You have to treat your
fellow beings as you want to be treated. You can't base a transition strategy on a triply
deceptive communication strategy: 1) misleading the funders (I can't prove this fully, but
I have strong anecdotal and personal experience of this) 2) systematically misleading your
own staff (there is plenty and systematic evidence for this) 3) misleading the public
through propaganda ..
Bernardo's attempt to suppress an independent evaluation is a proof of the latter. How
would a healthy p2p process be endangered by an open discussion? The truth is that the
flok attempted to create a mythology of success, and of political and social support that
wasn't there, and that Bernardo's highly stage-managed twitter storms were part of that
effort. The very reason that BG is attempting to suppress an evaluation of the FLOK, is
that it endangered potential backroom deals. My thesis is: if they are endangered by an
open discussion, what value do these deals ultimately have?
I'm preparing an evaluative essay on "Hacker Bolchevism, the paranoid style of politics in
p2p' to critique the non-prefigurative politics that were so characteristic of the FLOK
internal process.
Bernardo, you have nothing to gain by your attempts at intimidation, and much to loose, I
suggest you back off and respond to political arguments by political means, instead of
through systematic ad hominem attacks. That you think your threats have a place in an
open discussion, shows how far off the track you've already gone. Follow the wisdom of
DV, who is leaving me alone despite our differences.
That I have to do this now here as well, I regret, but I hope it will show you that you have
nothing to gain by these tactics, they will backfire.
Stalinistic tactics have no place in an open p2p culture.
I do not intend to pollute the p2p lists with these personal antagonisms (even as they
reveal antagonistic value systems and political and metholodgical approaches). I will at
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 27
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
most respond once to the counter-accusations that will undoubtedly follow this, but I can't
tolerate public and private intimidation when I am no longer part of the flok team.
The P2P Foundation network will continue with Commons Transition Processes, without the
use of the moniker FLOK, and in which the internal processes will match and prefigurative
the aims that we will want to achieve.
Michel
JULY 5
Michel Bauwens <michel@p2pfoundation.net>
To: P2P Foundation - Lista de correo en espa&#241, ol
<p2p-lang-es@lists.ourproject.org>
Cc: p2p-foundation <p2p-foundation@lists.ourproject.org>, Gordon Cook
<cook@cookreport.com>
Re: [P2P-es] A parting of ways with Bernardo Gutierrez july 5
I'm really sorry Bernardo, but your threat has been public and can be verified; second, if
you publicly and privately threaten me, I don't think you have any moral authority to
criticise that I make these threats public. I will send the URL of your facebook threat here
a bit later. You will note that this facebook account with a few thousand followers, and
with several dozen exclusively positive evaluations of my relatively positive evaluation of
the flok process, none of them even 'liked' the threat. It was absolutely out of place, while
a political discussion of flok is entirely in place. So here is the warning: please respond to
political analysis by counter-analysis. But if you respond to analysis by threats and
character assasination, you will find me on your way.
To deny that you did it won't work, and neither will be the argument that it was all meant
of a joke. I know you are following a precedent. Somebody we both know accused Gordon
Cook, of 1) not existing 2) being a front of Robert Steele 3) being a CIA agent 4) being an
adolescent ranter 4) being a neocon. That person, who spent several hours online
searching for proof, spread these accusations, and you gave credence to it by also
spreading it. When exposed as lies, can you then simple say, after trying to repeatedly
destroy a person's reputation.
And you still continue, you are shameless. Gordon Cook is the author of absolutely stellar
reports on p2p infrastructures, which can be verified and read at the Gordon Cook report.
His policy paper, which is excellent and breaks a lot of new ground, is also available
online. I copy Gordon so he can provide the URL's.
We have to reiterate the case of what happened to Gordon Cook as it was exemplary. Like
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 28
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
many other authors, Gordon Cook was promised $4,000 for a paper. This promise was
then unilaterally changed to $3,500 on condition that he would attend the summit. Since
Gordon had undergone a absolutely invasive and painful spinal operation, and needed a
series of eye interventions to boot. I was physically present twice when the promise was
made to him to facilitate the trip through a business class trip. Not once, but twice. That
promise was then also broken. And no, the maximum was not done to make it possible.
As has been already admitted, it was a conscious and political decision not to do it, not a
force majeure.
Now, f..ups are always possible. But you know it is a pattern. Every person who was asked
to leave the project has been systematically maligned. I'll review the list again, BH, an
excellent journalist and communicator, was accused of being on the payroll of US
intelligence for publishing a critical article; AD, was being branded as 'a spy of Senescyt'
and was threatened with physical intimidation; a research team member was threatened
with dismissal for expressing critique on the mailing list. In recent days, you have been
publicly trashing both the work of the research team and the communication team. It's a
paranoid style of politics and character assasination that has no place in an open culture.
If you can't avoid trashing people, have the wisdom to do it indoors, but don't publish and
spread unfounded and unproven accusations via the network.
I want to avoid speaking about this mess, it's not very interesting, unless as a generic
lesson for the future: don't let hierarchies dominate participatory projects.
Bernardo, I invite to challenge my political conclusions from now on, and I will avoid
publishing the facts of my experience. You have failed to intimidate me in my right to
politically evaluate flok, move on.
Take a hint from Daniel's approach in this controversy.
July 7th The Budget
Michel Bauwens <michel@p2pfoundation.net>
To :
networkedlabour@lists.contrast.org,
p2p-foundation
<p2p-foundation@lists.ourproject.org>
Reply-To: P2P Foundation mailing list <p2p-foundation@lists.ourproject.org>
[P2P-F] open budget july 7th
Orsan, you write:
<To avoid any negative impact for all the sides, I would humbly suggest, especially in
terms of financial aspects, providing full transparency (Flok, P2P-F, Cook Consultancy,
Ecuadorean ministries so on). And without practicing a sort of participatory budgeting,
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 29
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
IMHO, there will always be shadows of doubts and questions hanging on these kinds of
state-capital-funded projects.>
Orsan, the budget was highly secretive and tightly controlled by the flok mgt
team; in fact, AD was removed (though they are claiming he removed himself, so
I'm not sure), largely because he tried to get a regular and open budget done
controlled by the institution. It was the key area of contention and why he has been
called a spy.
Here is my guesswork:
* the project was tri-funded by the Min of Knowledge, the Senescyt innovation secretariat
and the IAEN institution
* the entire process with wages may have reached $400k , with an additional $300k plus
for the summit
The wage issue was highly contentious, from before I reached the project. The rector
wanted to pay intl' level wages to foreign researchers, and this was not taken well by the
locals. On the other hand, the institution payed some people very well who never showed
up, and trying to get rid of them is one of the causes that caused him the loss of his job.
The ratio of staff to students is incredibly skewed at the IAEN but I can't remember the
ratio, but much more staff than students.
My understanding is that most of the research team got $4k and I got $5.x as 'director'.
There is no doubt that this is well paid, but it is still less for a month than a private
consulting gets for a day. So, if the FLOK is a genuine transition project, that was not
outside of decency. There is a lot of discussion about the other salaries, which are
shrouded in secrecy. One of the most often expressed critiques directed at me and the
research team: how can you guys make so much noise when you are paid so well, 'aren't
you ashamed'; on the other hand, 'flok mgt works tirelessly for nearly nothing'. This is the
mythology, used again and again, but I'm not sure it is the truth; from very good
accounting sources, I was informed that they earned four times their claims, but I can't
prove this. But as I've learned not to trust anything said coming from the flok mgt, I tend
to give credence to my source.
As for me, yes, I was well paid, after living under the minimum wage for seven years. We
had to pay our own tickets, rent and rent guarantees, all internal job-related travels, and
because of the length of the engagement, I had to bring my family for two months (this
was a stated condition of my employment, even if I had to finance it myself). Because of
the structurally late payments, I had to pay 40% more for these tickets, and on average,
since we all had to take loans, 20% interest fees. So, just to say, despite appearances,
none of us got rich from this, and we worked tirelessly, in very tough circumstances, 12 to
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 30
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
14 hours a day, including many weekend days. So, we are
certainly not victims,
privileged for sure, but not getting rich on this assignment either. Neither of us asked for
anything, we accepted an invitation with its conditions, so I think the whole wage
controversy is really a side issue.
I'm not suggesting any budget malfeasance, the opacity of the budget was exclusively an
issue of political control. You should also take into account that due to the structural
non-payment, the flok mgt had to make superhuman efforts for the project to merely
survive. Two full-time staff were engaged just to speed up our payments (they achieved a
6 week average delay due to superhuman efforts): I was told, but can't verify this, that 26
signatures were needed each month for each wage, a sign of terrible bureaucracy. (while I
critique the hierarchical aspects of the mgt process we should not forget the extreme
structural stress they were facing day in day out).
Also, apart from the real work, we were forced to produce partly fictitious 'products',
taking 2-3 working days to produce, as proof of our work. These had to be delivered 10
days before the end of each month, hence having a 10 day 'future narrative' included. You
have no idea of the level of dysfunctional bureaucracy that was prevalent. This is not
exclusively a flok and IAEN problem, as the young and mosty precarious
Prometheo researchers also are routinely not paid for the first four months of
their work. Unless you have strong reserves to withstand such delays, I would
not recommend any foreigner to work as a scholar in Ecuador for the moment.
The Absurdity of Yachai
But if you have reserves and go for the experience and engagement with local people, it's
worthwhile, it's a spectacular place. The structural situation in Ecuador is that most of the
education funding goes to Yachai, a rather terrible neoliberal experiment in a green
desert, signing secret deals with Microsoft, etc .. There is really nothing there, and won't
be, for a very long time. While the existing universities are being underfunded, this
artificial place, which will be structurally incapable of attracting the creative class (even
Richard Florida thinks it's a terrible idea), is getting all the attention and funding. It's a
little bit like the anti-FLOK project, though funded by the same Ministry, one of the many
contradictions of the project and the political situation in Ecuador. Just as it was
impossible to find a single civic mvt with a positive view of the government (at least
amongst the 70 we spoke with); it was equally impossible to find a single university
administrator or scholar that supported the current education policy. It's part of
the divorce between the intellectual class and the government that I discussed
earlier,
Michel
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 31
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
Editor: what these emails do say is that in addition to the crazy manipulation of Vazquez
it is also highly likely that Renee Ramirez’s alleged knowledge of and participation in the
FLOK project was nothing more than a figment of Daniel Vasquez’s imagination.
Michel responded: Ramirez certainly knew about flok, what I'm questioning is if he knew
exactly what the flok was about .. from my conversation in march with one of his personal
assistants, he seemed to ignore what i was doing, how long I was staying and confused
flok with wikicoesc .. that doesn't prove per se that ramirez was ignorant, but if you put
all the pieces together, it would seem that there [was not?] much forthright
communication between the two negotiating parties.
On about July 15 I received an assessment of Ecuador from Michel dated July 17th for
publication in the p2p blog on that DAY. When the day came and went with no appearance
I wrote Michel who responded,
Hi Gordon,
We decided not to publish it after a internal meeting of p2p-f ... the reason is
that there is too much backlash and negative energy developing and we decided
that it was taking time away from our constructive pursuits ... when we argue for a
political assessment, they respond with threats .. they are not important enough for
spending all our time on this.
Below what I would have published without the decision of my colleauges, for the benefit
[of your American friend who has been giving speeches in Ecuador].
Editor’s Note: By July 27 Michel had added it to the p2p wiki and on the 28th he
responded to me: “it was not announced on the blog, as that would defeat the purpose of
not broadcasting but I did send you the same note privately, and it appeared more discreetly on the wiki without any effort at spreading [notification which would have defeated
the purpose of lowering the temperature.]”
An Assessment of the FLOK process and Why the P2P
Foundation will not use the FLOK brand in the Future
(Note: this version was originally written at the request of Jay Wallsjasper of On the
Commons, slightly expanded and updated on July 13; it’s a little more elaborate than the
first informal assessment shared here before)
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 32
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
Michel Bauwens:
We’re nearing the end of June, the day of my departure from Quito and my direct
involvement in the FLOK process, where I have been director of the research team. Many
people have asked about my assessment of the results of the process. The FLOK process
was a complex process and the assessment can only be complex as well. One of the first
questions, and critiques, is about the relationship with the government itself.
Let us start with the general statement that there are only very imperfect governments in
the world, and that power politics are everywhere difficult and rather unpleasant
processes. Nevertheless, if we compare the achievements and workings of the
government here, then Ecuador has made significant achievements since the advent of
power of the Correa administration. The control over the state and the government by
private business has been significantly reduced; state-led redistribution and infrastructure
building has significantly improved the economic situation of most of its citizens. There
have been significant improvements in poverty, literacy, education, crime, etc .. Political
stability and popular endorsement of government policies are significantly higher than in
the very unstable neoliberal period that preceded it. The state and many institutions have
been modernized. The new press legislation has reduced corporate control and created a
whole new sector of community-based radios and media outlets.
On the other hand, there seems to be a growing schism between civil society actors and a
government that was originally derived from it. The government has embarked on an
extractivist policy against its own promises and plans (Yasuni), disbanded oppositional
civil organisations like the Pachamama Foundation, and exerted pressures against critics
in the press. There is a growing schism between the beautiful and enthusing political
programs and principles as expressed in the Constitution and the National Plan, and the
actual policies that are often contrary to it, and many of those that believed in these ideas
are increasingly isolated in institutions like Senplades and Senescyt. They are losing
power and influence. The radical sounding ‘neo-socialist’ language of the government is
not matched by structural reforms that go into the direction of anything that is beyond
capitalism. On the contrary, the real policies, even though to the left of European
social-democracy, are essentially redistributionist and actually aim to create better
conditions for capitalist development. The poor are less poor, a middle class is being
created, but the economic policies do not fundamentally challenge the global political
economy. The current direction seems to be towards more adaptation to the demands of
the global system. But there is no doubt that the situation of the country and its people
has improved.
When we started the FLOK process, it was presented to us as a project that was strategic
for the Ecuadorian government, as supported by the Ministry of Knowledge and the
Secretariat of Innovation and would systematically move the country to a social
knowledge economy, and that would be enthusiastically received by civil organisations.
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 33
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
The reality we encountered was quite different. First of all, despite an intensive effort at
participation, and many meetings with local groups, the general attitude of civic
organisations was, though sympathetic for the aims of FLOK, at the same time distrustful
of it as a government-sponsored project. The pressure for participation came from us, not
from civil society.
Our experience with the government was very problematic from the start. First of all,
because of factional fighting within and without the institution we were formally working
for (IAEN), the staff of the project remained unpaid for 3-5 months, until the end of
March, with an active and successful campaign to defund the FLOK. At one point, we were
prepared to leave at the end of March because the funding had been cut, and we were all
facing extremely challenging material situations. Once the factional fight was concluded
with the departure of the rector who had initiated FLOK (Carlos Prieto), we were refunded,
and funds were also liberated for the Buen Conocer Summit at the end of May. Our
personal and collective situation dramatically improved from that point onwards.
Nevertheless, as research director of the FLOK team, in charge of a theoretically strategic
project, I was at no time able to meet with any of our sponsoring ministers. All planned
meetings (more than a dozen) between myself and Rene Ramirez and Guillaume Long,
were systematically cancelled. The very day before the launch of the Buen Conocer
Summit on May 27th, it transpired that the Minister of Knowledge had forbidden his staff
to participate in the summit (he reversed this decision on that very last day); and that
President Correa had not been aware of the FLOK process at all (I have this info from a
person in the Communications Dept. of the President and several other witnesses).
Whatever the reasons for this state of affairs, the only realistic conclusion is that this was
not considered as a strategic project. To this day, because we were unable to have
conversations with our nominal sponsors, we can ony speculate as to the real motivations.
Nevertheless, we have to look at the positive aspects of the government’s involvement as
well. First of all, the project was indeed funded, and nowhere else in the world could it
have taken place at this stage. Second, we operated in total freedom: the research team
was entirely free in its research and proposals, with zero interference. Third, and this is
very important for the future of our recommendations, there has been distinct enthusiasm
for the aims and process of the FLOK from lower level officials in several governmental
institutions, with concrete efforts to fund and carry out important pilot projects.
And, even though the pressure and social basis of the FLOK process was weak in civil
society, there was nevertheless a quite intense participatory process. 24 provincial
workshops were held with actors from civil society; several multi-day visits to poorer
communities were organized with intense mutual exchanges; participatory lectures were
held in different institutions with high interest and attendance; workshops were held in
various universities. All this input was integrated in the first drafts of our proposals. (An
open letter to global commoners also yielded several dozen proposals). The highlight was
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 34
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
a stay in Sigchos, the country’s third poorest district, where we met an enthusiastic mayor
(Mario Andino) and a supportive local assembly of the people eager to apply open
agricultural projects. This gave us a clear indication that with dynamic leadership, the
local people that matter (mostly indigenous and farmers), where totally behind the key
ideas of a transition to a commons-based society, and endorsed its logic and potential.
The second phase of the participatory process entailed open commentary on digital
comments, yielding many useful suggestions. But finally, what was very important was
the success of the Buen Conocer summit May 27 to 30. The combination of local civic
invitees, committed pubic officials, and foreign guests led to a very enthusiastic social
dynamic in which the FLOK proposals were substantially improved.
One of the key lessons though is that we have to abandon the romantic idea that we can
‘hack a country’. A country, and its people, are not an executable program. For future
projects, it will be necessary to ascertain with more due dilligence, the maturity of both
the political will and the social basis of such a transition. Commons transition programs
should be embarked upon as a more clear co-production process , and not undertaken as
political gamble. Commons transition should be bottom-up supported processes, enabled
and facilitated by supportive public authorities (or without them if that support is not
forthcoming).
One of the important lessons of the project is how not to administer it in the future. The
administrative process was a purely hierarchical one, with personalistic and secretive
control of the budget and decisions. The research team was entirely shut out of the design
and organisation of the Summit for example. Simple requests for information were not
looked kindly upon and were seen as interference. People who disagreed with
management did not just have to arbitrarily and unilaterally leave the project, without any
due process, but were maligned and subject to active disinformation campaigns involving
charges of spying etc … I was subjected to public threats to publish private emails in order
to discourage any independent evaluation, which is what prompted to add this specific
paragraph about the internal workings of the FLOK process. Engagements to third parties
were routinely changed and unilaterally adapted created all kinds of embarassements
towards those parties and endangering our trust and reputational capital. There was a
regular use of private and public intimidation, including a threat of physical
intimidation during the very summit, including against members of the research
team to discourage them from sharing their point of view on the public
discussion list. Strategically mistaken decisions, such as the defunding of the spanish
translation of the Commons Transition Plan, were made from narrow political reasons.
Such practices clearly should not have a place in future projects and are one of the
reasons the P2P Foundation will not use the FLOK moniker and ‘brand’ in future Commons
Transition projects. We believe our internal practices should be prefigurative of the kind of
society we are aiming for and not in contradiction to it. This is how the research team
functioned, and in the future, it is how a whole project should function. Our aim here
therefore is not to inflame conflicts, but rather to warn third parties of a potential systemic
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 35
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
flaw in the approach to such projects: authoritarianism can have no place in open and
participatory transition projects.
Nevertheless, despite the problems and failures in Ecuador, along with the relative success
we tried to describe above, we can hope that seeds of new thinking about transformation
have been sown, and that some pilot projects will be successfully carried out.
Indeed, the FLOK project also has a global impact, and I am quite optimistic about this.
First of all, this is the first time that an integrated Commons Transition Plan has been
crafted, representing a new political and policy orientation towards achieving a
post-capitalist society based on shared knowledge, that has both a theoretical
underpinning, and fifteen concrete legislative frameworks. This means that from now on, a
concrete third way that is different from both statism and neoliberalism, does exist and
can be discussed. Despite the local difficulties of the process, we believe that because of
the relative legitimacy and credibility involved in a national project, the commons
transition is now a geo-political fact, it’s a historical pivot. This assessment is confirmed by
the consistent interest that is expressed towards the project, with inquiries of cities and
regions as to the possibility of other transition projects. The FLOK is now both a
participatory and scientific research process, and a already existing body of work, that can
be creatively adapted (and changed, or abandoned altogether), in other locales. The
emerging commons, sharing, and p2p movements can now be more than concrete local
practice of grassroots communities, they can become a force for social change at the
political and policy level.
The value of the experience in Ecuador, with all the people that contributed to it, is that it
signifies a new beginning, the creation of a new social imaginary about commons oriented
transition towards a sustainable and more just society. The clock is now ticking, and
the arrow of time cannot be reversed. We are beginning to find a politics and
policy for the 21st century. This is not a minor achievement and I am proud I
have been able to contribute to it.
I urge people to have a serious look at the Commons Transition Plan, and to think about
the new political concepts that are the expression of the nascent and growing global
commons movement.
The proposals are here at http://en.wiki.floksociety.org/w/Research_Plan. Let’s improve
them continuously and produce a pattern language for successful social change.
On July 26 Orsan Senalp commented on the p2p list: The fact that following the EU
elections the murdered civilians in critical conflicts like in Ukraine, Gazza, Syria, and Iraq
rapidly increased, is alarming. These might be the last warnings for the approaching 'train
accident', going to be caused by the elite in fight on the steering wheel. The models and
systems of managing the status-Quo does not work and as they are unable to deliver the
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 36
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
new. The ruling classes leading entire world in to a catasptrohpe of yet another corrective
war is inevitable. This situation is felt shared, yet not shout out. Yet it has re-flamed
(again) the discussion and exchange of ideas and practises on the 'transition', with its
revolutionary, reformist or synthetic (Refo-lution/REvolution) versions. To 'get it' this time
is becoming more and more mortal in every second.
COOK Report: in general I agree with you Orsan. I believe that Michel is one of the most
importunity resources the world has in avoiding the on rushing disaster you describe. But
I am also quite alarmed that as of my last contact with him just about a week ago he appears to have capitulated to the attacks of the Ecuadorian spaniards who don't like that he
would dare to assert that he has a right to write is own assessment of what happened..
He has publicly promised such an assessment. I have two drafts of an intermediate version and yet apparently because of issues in Spain on the part of those who want to see
Ecuador swept under the carpet he has decided to capitulate and fall silent in the face of
their threats.
In my opinion this is setting up the biggest disaster of all and is why I shall publish
lengthy open letter to Michel on July 31. [Editor’s Note: In his statement I am referring
to this Aug Sept COOK Report part 2. As Michel notes below he feels aggrieved that I direct attention to him rather than to the malefactors. Let me say AGAIN my comments
and actions are not AGAINST Michel. They are AGAINST the fact that having tried to destroy Michel and failed, they then turn their threats against P2Ps core international contributors. And here they have - for the most part - actually succeeded. That these key
p2p people could successfully be threatened by the Bolshevist army gathered by FLOK
Management is really regrettable.]
Bauwens: Gordon, to explain my position. There has been a collective decision by the
core members of the p2p foundation, asking me to refrain from further negative reactions,
and I will abide by it.
COOK Report: Yes I know Michel you have said that…. note the words “negative”…. positive reaction to the way you were treated are just fine?
You say there has been “collective decision by the core members of the p2p foundation
asking you to refrain”
OK who are they please? You will disclose surely?
Bauwens: However, our position is available on the wiki for those who search and ask,
we are just not spreading it actively.
COOK Report: I am asking for it. It is generally regarded that something like this might
well should be announced… if it was, i did not see it although I have a seen a draft of a
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 37
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
assessment scheduled for publication on july 17 that never came out and another scheduled for the 19th that was withdrawn as a result of threats made against you. That I believe is the meeting you are referring to?
Bauwens: My associates estimated that anyone who needs to know, is already aware
of the logic of the flok mgt team.
COOK Report: “who needs to know”…. well Michel please who does need to know. Have
the flokista Spaniards managed to divide the p2p movement in two? Into those who need
to know and those who don't. That is something you'd expect to hear from the Pentagon
not from p2p.
Bauwens: I regret that Gordon is focusing on me as a person in this whole affair
COOK Report: No I am focusing on you as the leader and founder of p2p who has
pledged to the community he founded that after taking ill considered actions and getting
himself in one hell of a mess has now backed down.
Bauwens: Why an open letter to the person who challenged the abuse, and not to those
that conducted the abuse. It seems to me Gordon is focusing on the wrong person(s).
COOK Report: Those who conducted the abuse have shown they are not capable of rational trustworthy action. It is YOU Michel who need to act with utmost integrity at
this point and not let these "bolsheviks" threaten you into silence.
You promised a detailed evaluation and the hyenas started to bray at your heels. You
published a half hearted evaluation and used stealth to put it on the p2p wiki keeping it
out of the blog. More than once you said you are preparing an evaluative essay on
"Hacker Bolchevism, the paranoid style of politics in p2p' . But now that essay will never
be writtern bercuase dong so would get in the way of the work of core p2p people whose
identity will be given to an outside party only under the pledge of the most strict secrecy.
My complaint with you at this point is that you apparently won't defend yourself any further and you try to cloak your decision behind the shadow of a collective request of the
"core p2p group" and sorry I don't know what such a group is.
This collective request will likely turn out to be the most important action ever undertaken
in the entire history of the organization that you have dedicated your life to building.
Surely you will be more transparent about who the members are and the nature of the request…apparently it was thought not capitulating would stand in the way of other more
important p2p work. Hope that is not the first step down the slippery slope of the end
justifying the means.
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 38
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
You need to publish the evaluation because you announced it, as a matter of
selfdefense, while under heavy attack, and claiming at the time that you would
not be intimidated. Not only that, but after the mess, everybody is waiting for
closure. If you don't provide close and you are not doing so then the rumor mills
will be in full control. Not only of flok but also of your reputation.
If you don't take that final step, the psychopaths will stand straight in their shoes and feel
their power, and keep bullying everybody until someone else will confront them at some
point in the future, take the heat, and eventually shut their big mouths, or capitulate as
you area now very conveniently try to do - it was not my decision it was that of the core
group enter another loop. Abandoning now will give them the impression that "they won".
Abandoning your solemn word will also raise the question of whether people should trust
you in the future.
On the contrary, if you comply with your word, you will have closure for yourself,
and for everybody else. Other people can then make their own minds about
what happened, and you can safely disconnect from the conversation, as you will
have said everything you needed to say. But for the opponents, things will become a
tad harder to play with: they will be caught red-handed, with their own image and only
their own reflection to fight against. At this point, they'd better just shut up and move on,
for they stand on moving sands, and third parties will have the whole history to judge
anything they would say.
I am sick and tired of Ecuador…. but I now have a portion of that history and i shall put it
out in the open. let the flokistas come rabidly after me. As you pointed out I am now getting to be an old man and i care about my own legacy than their threats. I stand on my
record.
You got into one god awful mess Michel. Stand up in public and speak the truth. I am
continuing to get new reports from Ecuador. They aren't pretty and raise a lot of suspicions. Only you know exactly what Daniel promised you. Bernardo may be threatening to
destroy you if you don't shut up, but for gods sake please do not capitulate. Even if the
truth is not pretty. Please tell it.
What i am drafting is for YOU because i am working under the assumption that you can
still be communicated with. Your Opponents have way over played their hand. We are
hearing now that the presidents office didn't know about the folk project until the weekend before the summit. With 26 signatures required to pay the bills that assumption
seems rather absurd. There ate too many people with first hand knowledge to paste together something that safely buries this.
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 39
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
Finally, On July 27 on the p2p List -Dear Gordon,
There has been no capitulation; the decision is simply not to broadcast the conflict further
at this stage; the evaluation is and has been publicly available on the wiki for all who
want to read it,
via http://p2pfoundation.net/FLOK_Society_Project#Evaluation_by_Michel_Bauwens
COOK Report: I look at your blog everyday and I believe that it was not announced
there. I did see it in a private note that you sent which which i thought also said it was
cancelled due to the decision of the core group. I also recall that i have not seen any p2p
blog posts in about 10 days. I recall James Burke said there were technical issues in Amsterdam that he was working on? I would like to remain subscribed to the blog. But I am
no longer receiving anything from the p2p blog. I hope this will change I will read and report according on the material that you have pointed me too
Bauwens: I will communicate you the names of the people in that meeting privately, as
they have been subjected to a hate campaign (associated with attempts at bribery) themselves and now is not the time to have a red cloth in front of a bull .. They have not
threatened me into silence but have rendered the work and life of many of our associates
unnecessarily difficult and they all feel furthering the conflict is [Not?] worth this derailment of their work; I just respect that decision, that's all.
COOK Report: appreciate your willingness to do this.
I would prefer not to ask. But something that is not clear are you referring to the Ecuadoran p2p team? Or to key p2p people in Europe? Or both?
Bauwens: on July 28: to the international team of contributors to the p2p-foundation
work, not to the Ecuadorian researchers who are only more loosely associated with our
network.
Have you ever thought that by giving so much negative energy to a small group you may
in fact be feeding them? And on July 28: apart from BG, who seems a loose cannon for
them as well, they have made a conscious effort not to feed the controversy (though I do
get pressuring private emails).
COOK Report: They don't seem to need to be fed.
Bauwens: They have been outed and the information is available in different sources for
those who want it.
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 40
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
COOK Report: Yes and I am doing my part to make sure that as much information as
possible is out there on "the net".
And on July 28 Bauwens: Gordon, I am now also no longer responding to this controversy and the prods coming from you here.
As I said, I regret to be the focus of your
open letter, as the only person who actually challenged their practices publicly, rather than
the focus on the do-ers of the deeds.
COOK Report: So lets see what Michel is saying: I think you know all you need to
know. SO P2P which pre FLOK was transparent, ends with secrecy based on the
“need to know.” Michel violates the pledges he made to his community and
when asked for an explanation resorts to obfuscation. Since the identity of the
core members is now thanks to FLOK a secret, I must result to speculation.
Since you feel compelled to hide their identities, this seems like a good candidate list.
Eimhin David Shortt <involuteconduit@gmail.com>, Jun 10, 2014 - Eimhin David Shortt,
a community organizer in Ireland who works with Get Local and the P2P Foundation, says
that, due to a struggling …..
Vasilis Kostakis <kostakis.b@gmail.com>, on the flok team for open design and
openhardware
Layne Hartsell <hartsellml@p2pfoundation.net>, "Layne Hartsell is a research fellow in
the philosophy of ethics and technology at the P2P Foundation, and at The Asia Institute
in Convergence and 3E (energy, economy, and environment). He has held teaching/
research positions at Mahidol University Siriraj Medical Center, Bangkok; Sungkyunkwan
University, South Korea; and the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia."
Vinicius Braz Rocha <vr.self.media@gmail.com>, Netweaver for Micro Glocal CoCreative
Economy via VR SELF MEDIA P2P Network
Chris Giotitsas <chrisgiot87@gmail.com>, Chris Giotitsas is an Internet researcher and
research fellow at the P2P Lab. Currently, he is pursuing a post-graduate degree at the
Ragnar Nurkse School of Innovation and Governance, Tallinn University of Technology.
Contact: chris.giotitsas at gmail.com and colleague of Vasilis Niaros
Victor Valenzuela <victoroshw@gmail.com>, on the flok team for open design and
openhardware
George Papanikolaou <georgepapani@gmail.com>, Doctorate of Philosophy (PhD), Genetic Basis of Hereditary Hemochromatosis in Greeks, FirstDepartment of Medicine, School
of Medicine University of Athens, Athens 2003
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 41
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
Dimitris <dimitris@tolabaki.gr>, New campaign for cheap Arduino boards & learning kits
at indiegogo Donations to labaki table
Pablo Troncoso <langtronk@gmail.com>, Pablo Troncoso Uriarte, 22 años, estudiante de
Psicología en la U. de Chile, Autor de libro EL FILO DEL …
Vasilis Niaros http://p2pfoundation.net/Vasilis_Niaros is an engineer/urbanist and a PhD
student at the Ragnar Nurkse School of Innovation and Governance, Tallinn University of
Technology. His research interests include open source technologies, interactive urban
spaces and do-it-yourself culture. He is a research fellow at the P2P Lab and the coordinator of the project "Revitalizing urban public space using open source technologies".
Contact: vasilis.niaros at gmail.com
Stacco Troncoso <staccotroncoso@gmail.com Here is Stacco Troncoso talking on the p2p
blog about his good buddy Bernardo: “See what’s at stake. Read Bernardo’s article (below), and follow the updates on MediaLab’s newly created Twitter account for its defense:
@savethelab. And here in the p2p blog of January 31 2014 It Is Not a Revolution, It Is a
New Networked Renaissance by Stacco Troncoso. P2P Foundation collaborator, Bernardo
Gutiérrez writes for OWS’ Theory Thursday segment on the interconnected, non-linear nature of the global revolutionary process. You can read the full piece here at
OccupyWallStreet.org.”
COOK Report: So Bernardo did not suddenly come rocketing in from outer space. He has
been around here all along. And here is Bernardo teaming up with Stacco on the FLOK
research list On March 5, 2014:
Dear Friends
I write to inform you that we are working to relaunch the communication strategy of FLOK. An
open strategy of communication-action, communication-connection. We have already the new site
online: FlokSociety.org We want to open the site to new content. At the moment, FLOK has just
talked about the essence and the FLOK and daily actions. From now, we want to publish text about
free culture and open knowledge, for strengthen the FLOK imaginary. We are open to any ideas,
text, article. They can be exclusive or already published with free license. Ecuador and Latin America will be priorities. But surely we are interested in publishing texts from the rest of the world.
COOK Report: So Michel are these the core P2P foundation members on whose behalf
you have now instituted a “need to know?” And have withdrawn your solemn pledge to
this community to tell the complete story of FLOK to the World?
You should not be surprised when people ask.
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 42
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
It seems to me that these people who have heaped such abuse on you want to capitalize
on the FLOK experience anyway, sell it to the next government, inscribe it as an original
innovation with just enough criticism that “radicals” like us are satisfied, but not enough
changes to compromise "the bigger picture".
The bigger picture is the need to keep the activism going and to organize as
some kind of NGO so that they can get their own activities funded by left leaning
parts of national governments or global charitable organizations. It is the act of
“activism that is important here. It is also the preservation of the activist NGO
and its ability to gain income for its members. Results be damned. Connections
that help people be damned. As Daniel said to me in the long skype conversation in
early March: I was on my commune in Spain throwing rocks at the capitalists and if this
doesn’t work out I will go back to the commune and go back to throwing rocks at the
capitalists.
Well there you go Michel. You went back on your word to the p2p community as a whole
so Bernardo’s buddies could keep their FLOK “brand” alive. Was this worth your breaking
trust with the rest of us?
Michel show me something truly significant that these professional full time hell
raising activists have done for the people of Ecuador rather than for their own
personal greater glory.
I will close by recapitulating some of the ‘promises” you made and now for reasons that,
according to you, I don’t need to know, you have broken.
July 4 -
Note Michel’s statements in his July 4 email
The very reason that BG is attempting to suppress an evaluation of the FLOK, is that it
endangered potential backroom deals. My thesis is: if they are endangered by an open
discussion, what value do these deals ultimately have?
I'm preparing an evaluative essay on "Hacker Bolchevism, the paranoid style of politics in
p2p” to critique the non-prefigurative politics that were so characteristic of the FLOK
internal process.
But on July 16 in a note to Quiliro reposted on your list on the 17th where
Bernardo threatens to destroy you you begin to capitulate. This appeared on the
p2p foundation list on July 17 El mié 16 jul 2014 05:42:16 ECT, Michel Bauwens escribió:
Dear Quiliro,
While things may look quietly on the western front, they may be less than you think,
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 43
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
after the public threats to publish my private emails so I wouldn't publish an independent
political evaluation, BG has systematically targetted my associations, threatening to
'bring me down', promising a bombshell, and trying to wean them away from the
network promising juicy flok contracts ... this is just the way they operate, and none
of us is going to change that ..
There are particular group dynamics at work there, a paranoid style of politics that
dictates that who is not 100% with them, is necessarily a dark enemy. Bernardo's case is
typical, he was not there most of the time, yet a few days after arriving, got convinced of
their truths and actively started to spread disinformation; even when I sent him
counterfactuals, he continued.
It is one thing to believe someone out of loyalty and trust, but another thing to continue
to actively spread them when you already know they are untrue.
As for myself, I will of course never again work in this dynamic, and I'm trying to ignore
the many false accusations that BG is spreading.
The danger is that we sink into negativity, which they seem to enjoy as conquistadores,
keeping us away from our constructive work.
I'm trying to ignore these dynamics as best as I can.
On July 18 Michel Bauwens to the p2p list: As most of you know, in related lists,
Bernardo Gutierrez openly threatened to publish private emails if I did not stop publishing
independent evaluations of the flok experience; and I have had other private and
more friendly emails from flok mgt associates asking me why I am spreading
critical material. The answer is simple, we are pluralistic and have spread
various perspectives for and against different p2p issues, since at least 2002.
This is our right of free speech and we're not going to stop either by responding
by self-censorhip to friendly requests, or outright threats. In my 15 years of
activity, this is the first time, and all related to flok, that my right to curate material has
been challenged so systematically, and I consider it characteristic of a mode of operation
which I reject.
My Closing Comments for Michel
COOK Report: I think that you are one of the most honest and ethical persons on the
net. (Certainly at least up to this point in time.) But the timing of this project got squarely
in the way of what had been a financially very difficult situation for you, created as your
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 44
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
public knows by the hacking into P2P accounts on the part of Franco Iacomella. Nothing
had gone right for you in 2013 and finally in early August you announced that you had
discovered why. And put out a statement of disassociation with Franco. Daniel, when we
were still talking, told me that he sent his first email to you on August 8. Suddenly you
went from being in a deep financial hole to the prospect of almost a years employment at
$5000 a month - a very badly needed sum of money that could help you recover. Who
could blame you for jumping at the prospect and for not looking this gift horse too deeply
in the mouth?
Here, since you have stopped answering questions, I am forced to resort to conjecture.
Just as you did above in attempting an explanation of Daniel’s behavior. By accepting
the offer and coming halfway around the world to a foreign country without any
resources of your own, you were leaping into a situation where your ultimate
survival could depend on Daniel’s treatment of you. If he didn’t pay you, you were
in deep trouble. And we both know that he used this tactic against you.
So I let me just mention once more the result of that. I did not get the help or information
from Jenny Torres that I had been promised. I complained to you at the end of February
bitterly saying that I cannot continue to work in the dark. You said to me that you just
couldn’t understand why she was not responsive but as we got into March matters
changed. What happened? Now you offer your own admission that you delayed looking at
my work for six weeks because FLOK management had trashed it making the ridiculous
assumption that I was undoubtedly an agent of the CIA. By the end of March you had to
have known that any successful conclusion of my policy paper would be highly unlikely
especially since essentially one person named Daniel Vazquez was the sole decider regardless of how many other people would have to sign off on it. Yet when I told you in
sheer frustration later in March and again in April that I felt it absurd continue to work under these conditions, you strongly encouraged me not to quit. And you never even
hinted that what I was doing had been effectively politically killed. Under absolutely false circumstances as well.
I have asked you about this twice and never had a reply. Since I have not had a reply I
will make my own conjecture. Daniel expected you to get a paper out of me even though
he was trashing me. Why? I wish I knew. But consider the evidence in his mid afternoon
comment on the research list on May 6. To your statement “I cannot rewrite your paper
and take responsibility for your writing.” (At this point I had withdrawn my paper. Leaving
a gap in the agenda that for the moment was unwelcome. And in effect Daniel (in the
sentence directly below) was saying that you should produce a paper that would replace
it.)
Daniel Vazquez: Bad starting, that is your work as director, at least to be sure that
Daniel or Jenny do it, but not left this responsability in the air…
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 45
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
COOK Report: Sadly you needed money to pay you rent and buy food to eat and by now
your familiy had joined you, so with Daniel controling whether you would be paid or not
you had little choice but to in effect say ‘yes sir’. No wonder you speak of PTSD.
There are other issues of serious omission. By January when Bethany’s Newsweek article
came out and she was safely back in Canada, not saying what had happened to her and
not saying much of anything about Correa’s treatment of his indigenous people, was really
bad. I was angry when I realized that you had to have known about this sort of thing and
remained silent. But now its clear that, perhaps you had little choice because, if you
angered Daniel, he simply would withhold your pay. And not just pay - what about the
ticket home for you and your family? Although perhaps your ticket was assured and you
were just reluctant to criticise the president whose favor you desired? We will I suppose
never know the truth given that you have invented a reason to violate the pledge of full
disclosure you gave to your own community.
But thank you for your information, for your report of July 19th which is helpful - it was a
first step and only a first step - and for your exchanges with Orsan as well. Lessons are
being learned. What Orsan says about situation where a commons transition could be
applicable at some point in the future is one example of such a lesson. But was all this
worth the price of getting in bed with a nest of pit vipers?
We are in a complex urbanized society where possession of money is a necessity for
survival. And yet we let things evolve so that fewer and fewer have access to enough
money to even live minmal lives. People who in effect have already lost everything will
sooner of later resort to violence. When that happens, the outcome is never good. One
would hope that for future engagements places like CIC could get enough resources from
their commons environment to treat you fairly. [See the March 2014 CIC interview by
Michel and John Restakis.] But in my opinion, the fact that your fellow commoners have
been successfully abused to the point where, rather putting all cards on the table, you
offer them what is in efect a white flag does not bode well. But again are they being
abused by Daniel Vazquez and Bernardo or are they merely ALL of them fighting each of
for control of alleged FLOK monetary contracts? It seems that thanks to your capitulation
we shall never know.
Now as a you put it “I now know all I need to know.” So what does that mean? It means
that the P2P is divided in two: those who know who won and who lost and the rest of us
who have no need to know,
My hope here is that I and like minded others can put enough evidence in the public
domain about “flok management” and its associates so that ANYONE they approach in
future will understand the absolute neccessity of asking very serious questions. They
seem to be kidding themselves that they have a viable “brand” - when the reality is that
anyone who is approached by them had better run in the other direction.
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 46
THE COOK REPORT ON INTERNET PROTOCOL
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 2014
Why? Because pledges made mght be kept or we may find out that they were like
Bernardo’s guerrila theater. Made to be broken.
That’s all. Over and out. I truly wish you more success - next time.
NEXT ISSUE on or about September 30 - Oct 1
A visit to Open Source Ecology (Factor e Farm) with an interview with founder Marcin
Jakubowski. Also likely to be covered - Anita Dixon and her efforts to revitalize the three
square miles of the Mutual Musicians Foundation. Focus on the Kansas City Freedom
Network and FNF will likely compose the January February 2015 issue out about
December 1
© 2014
COOK NETWORK CONSULTANTS 431 GREENWAY AVE. EWING, NJ 08618-2711 USA SEPT OCT PART 2
PAGE 47