[Mesh] Fwd: Notes on Governing the Wireless Commons

Also a highly relevant conversation. I'll give a more in-depth reportback once I have finally escaped the wondrous black hole that is c-base. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jenny Ryan <jenny(a)thepyre.org> Date: Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 4:53 PM Subject: Notes on Governing the Wireless Commons To: Greg Bloom <greg.bloom(a)gmail.com> 1. Clearly defined *boundaries*, which delineate who has access to the Common pool resource. - *"I clearly understand for which resources I need to care and with whom I share this responsibility*." - "This network is open to everyone" is also a clear boundary. - Many forms of contribution make it difficult to define boundaries. - Hyperlocal services provisioned to a specified area. - Take the risks and define boundaries when necessary. - Once connected to the Internet (which is propietary), terms and conditions may apply. 2. Appropriation and provision *rules* which are tailored to local conditions. - *"We use the means (time, space, technology, and the quantity of a resource) that are available in a given context. As commoner I am satisfied that there is a fair relationship between my contributions and the benefits I receive."* - Rule of Who's not In is Out. - Cellular network in Oaxaca, once they had it, it was available to other communities, and the network community decided that they did not want the other communities to be able to access their network. - "Rules" makes it seems like it's set in stone. 3. Collective-choice arrangements, that allow most resource appropriators to participate in the *decision-making* process. - *"We enter into or modify our own rules and commitments, and every commoner can participate in this process. Our commitments serve to create, maintain, and preserve the commons to satisfy our needs."* - BTOP project in Philadelphia to build out computer centers sought out community group buy-in, in order to more effectively implement the project. - Do-ocracy: Ask for forgiveness not for permission 4. Effective *monitoring* - monitors accountable to appropriators, or are appropriators. - *"We monitor the respect of these commitments ourselves and sometimes we mandate others whom we trust to help reach this goal. We continually reassess whether our commitments still serve their purpose."* - In a way, Community Wireless Networks are a resource that is very easy to monitor (traffic analysis) compared to some other commons. - Process of monitoring and management is usually limited a smaller group of people who has technical expertise. Maybe we need better tools for "lay-users" to be able to monitor and manage common resources. - "You have too many goats in our field... maybe you can eat some of them?" - Problem of "commoners" vs. "consumer-commoners" - Think of a church which gives food only to those who worship with them, vs one that provides to everyone and invites them to worship. - Disconnect / lack of empathy between consumers and producers is core to the problem 5. Graduated *sanctions* for resource appropriators who violate operational community rules. - *"We work out appropriate rules for dealing with violations of our commitments. We determine whether and what kinds of sanctions shall be used, depending on the context and severity of a violation."* - Technological sanctions like ACLs (Access control list can ban certain devices), filtering, QOS. - What are some user-friendly (positive) graduated sanctions we could adopt? - Freifunk: Script running a system of points for individual nodes that are throttled when a certain limit is reached 6. *Conflict resolution* mechanisms that are cheap and rapidly accessed. - *"Every commoner can make use of a space and means for conflict resolution. We seek to resolve conflicts among us in an easily accessible and straightforward way."* - Guifi has a formalized conflict resolution process. Gufi has a operator license that is an umbrella for the members of the foundation. - If an organization fails to fulfill the license agreement, the following steps are taken: - 1. Contact directly the organizers - 2. Have an open discussion between the parties - 3. Have a sit down meeting. - 4. Generally turns out that one party has not fulflilled the license and that is the source of the conflict. - 5. Final step is taking the conflict to court - Creator/consumer user hierarchy among the commoners - on one end is simply agreement to the TOS, the other creating the rules. 7. *Self-determination* of the community recognized by higher-level authorities. - *"We regulate our own affairs, and external authorities respect that."* - There are new regulations (in Germany?) that make it so that network operators are also held accountable for violations, which makes people nervous. - DC had a municipal fiber networks that other organizations could connect to - community anchor institutions attempted to organize mesh networks, which spooked the government into rejecting it (due to their lack of formal institutional structure). - Must adjust self-governing principles to cooperate with the authorities. We mostly work in wireless because that's where we *can* be self-determining (open spectrum). - CONFINE project funded by the EU supports the formation of local community wireless networks 8. *Nested enterprises. *Larger CPRs are organised in the form of multiple layers of nested enterprises, with small local CPRs at the base level. - *"We realize that every commons is part of a larger whole. Therefore, different institutions working at different scales are needed to coordinate stewardship and to cooperate with each other."* - Network (FNF) in Kansas city has a design pattern that reflects different levels of functionality and access. Guifi.net has zones. Many different projects have a concept of different levels of access. Freifunk and c-base have a layered structure, where each part of the structure manages its own resources but they have a common idea or interest. - Burning Man is a large organization that could be characterized as having a similar structure. - A common identity helps everyone to feel associated, like Freifunk or CCC. Guifi could be a similar model - The Guifi Foundation hosts principles for new network organizations to form around.