Moderators, Rangers and Elders: Oh My!

The internet is on fire after a woman was threatened on the internet with rape and violence after successfully persisting in petitioning the bank of England to get a woman on one of their banknotes that didn't earn fame due to the luck of whose uterus she came out of. I'm not going to link to the current discussion or the petition that arose out of this latest all too familiar incident. But I will say I signed it but I left a comment.  This post is meant to elaborate on my comment.

I am 46 and sent my first message across the internet in 1986. I was a young university student studying math and taking a mandatory computer science course at the now quite well known for technology University of Waterloo. I didn't know that I was on the internet at the time and that term wasn't even coined yet. I was on an inter-university-governmental communication system that was spread all across North America. After 1986, when I was taking further courses in computer science (I ended up minoring in it, it fascinated me), I was exposed to vast repositories of knowledge and discussion on these systems. After graduating with my first degree and working for a year, I knew I had to come back and learn more. I chose to go into an engineering program at the same university that specializes in understanding systems. From 1991 - 1999 I pursued graduate work in the Management of Technology. I completed a Master's degree and am ABD on a PhD in the topic.

So I basically have over a quarter century of lived and studied experience in this space we now call the internet, or just the net. That's a fair amount and really makes me an elder.

I cringe using this word, elder. Inner voice: Who gives me the right to call me that? Newfound Voice, Calmly: "Your education and experience are legitimate, own it. Just because no-one is paying you to say or write this stuff doesn't mean it doesn't need to be said."

My personal growth in the last few years has taken me on a fascinating journey of self realizations and awakenings. The personal has become political in all sorts of ways. My longevity on the net has made me afraid of ego. I've been victimized online. I've only been not anonymous online for the past 8 years due to cyberstalking that occurred in around 1997. That terrified me and shut me up.

Even after I removed my anonymous shield I've been leary. However, my recent journey has led me to the point of I just don't care anymore. I will say what I want and if you think my motivations are ego driven I can assure you, with the core of my being, that they are not. What I see is driven by my raison d'etre, driven into me in my youth and surfacing regularly throughout my life:  I want to see the world left in a better condition than when I arrived. I don't want to be part of the problem anymore, I want to be part of the solution.

Pussyfooting around egos is not working. Ego is not part of the solution. Ego = ME. Community = WE. I have come to the point in my life, with Daughter grown, that I am willing to actually die for this belief in the necessity of community.

I see a lot of ego in Social Media. I might even argue that it is literally out of control. This latest fiasco over rape threats has highlighted this fact because some of the detractors to the abuse button petition are people who have benefitted from calling out abusers. If their 'skill' is replaced by a button, how will they garner attention? They don't say this, of course. There is a new Newspeak and many internet users are expert at it.

Back in the discussion board days there were moderators appointed that had experience and longevity and were respected by board group members. This doesn't exists in the mainstream social media sites of today and if it does on the lesser known platforms (like on reddit or 4chan) the sites themselves are still largely patrolled by men who think 'post your local weather girl pix' are fine. If I were to call that out I would be called a prude and told to get over myself. I have backed away from these environments long ago because as a woman I have been targeted for too long. 27 years is a long time and it is most of my adulthood. I am tired. But now I'm seeing that a critical mass of women is developing online and perhaps now is the time we can try and put measures in place that ensure online spaces are safe.

I believe all communication systems, throughout millenia, need appointed moderators. Moderators that might be paid but are appointed by users not shareholders in the capitalistic marketplace. Moderators that have a full understanding of the limitations and strengths of healthy terms of service agreements and can work with employees to improve them. In the early 90s there were tons of people kicked out of discussion groups for behaviours that today get called trolling and laughed off. A rape threat would have incurred banning them for life immediately.

I fear that our ego celebrity driven world is making the online space too toxic for women. I also fear that the online space is the only way women can gather enough in numbers to truly liberate future women from human trafficking and violence. Men run everything, still. Everywhere, still. Twenty years ago on the fledgling internet there was a much greater understanding of inappropriate behaviour online. The community was so small that 'policing' it was manageable. It is now out of control (like I said before).

I hope some social media company somewhere takes this suggestion to heart. We need moderators. If they are looking for a current very successful model in order to develop a strategy they could look at the Ranger community at Burning Man. It has long fascinated me and as with many things Burning Man, it is quite innovative.

Lack of Imagination regarding 21st Century Slavery

I had the good fortune to hear Gustavo Esteva talk live here in Toronto twice this week. Also, I saw a series of disturbing videos this week on Migrant Labour in Canada (here is a 53 minute National Film Board of Canada film from 2003, and sadly, things have gotten worse, not better, since then). I am also deep in the midst of setting up another Impossibly Single event with the theme of Prostitution so am introducing myself to a whole new lexicon and expanding my knowledge of feminist theory.

The perpetual learner in me is thrilled for the new content I am pouring into my brain but I also feel that I am drowning in the bleak reality of 21st century slavery. I'll do a future post on prostitution after becoming better informed and will just focus on the Migrant Worker issue in this post.

It struck me this week that technology and our world's increasing reliance on  it is managing to divide humanity in new and creative ways. The improvements in the technology of getting one human to another place and the cost of travel relative to income in the Global North have created a global marketplace for human trafficking that is unprecedented in scope and destruction. We are excelling in technological progress while regressing in morality.

Here are some facts I've amassed after absorbing lots of new info this week:

1. Migrant workers are not allowed to form a union. They work 7 days a week and well over 8 hours each day. Labour laws do not apply.
2. Recent immigration changes have  increased the number of migrant workers in Canada to 350,000. That's 1% of our population. The 1% that have no rights (see fact 1) as opposed to the 1% that own our corporations. The perverseness of this dichotomy is elegant to my mathematical mind.
3. If a migrant worker complains to their consulate they are told to behave better. Consulates are for corporations. When will we get that, finally?
4. If a migrant worker complains too much they will be refused a renewal by their 'owners'. Yes. That's what one of the farm operator's called them in that documentary I linked above. Some farm operator's call their workers "Little Donkeys". For every migrant worker that gets kicked out of the program there are many more people waiting behind them for a position. The politics of poverty and our food system is clearly evidenced by this sad reality.
5.  Migrant workers pay EI but claim no benefits. Instead of removing the requirement that they pay these benefits, why don't we work towards paying them during the off season like the fishery workers receive in Newfoundland?

One of the many powerful ideas Mr. Esteva discussed was regarding Corn (Maize) and it's relationship with people. Corn does not grow well on it's own. It needs cultivation by people to prosper. Humans, over millenia, have created a knowledge base around corn in Mexico.  This knowledge involves hundreds of varieties of maize and the best environment for their growth. The campesino movement, which is expanding globally, wants this knowledge base to be preserved. There is a deep understanding of people in the campesinos of the symbiotic relationship between maize and humans. The corn needs people and in turn the people need corn. If we do not preserve this symbiosis, our species will die.

Ironically, he also noted that scientific research is showing that North Americans contain more corn in their bodies than Mexicans. Corn additives are everywhere in the North American diet and many additives in our medications are derived from corn too. North Americans are, literally, people of the corn while the people of the Campesinos are more metaphorically people of the corn. More importantly, the people of the campesinos know that the need to fuel our bodies with pure healthy food trumps corporate interests. They have managed to survive the development binge of the late 20th century and defy chemical 'progress' when it comes to agri-business. This leaves the people of the campasinos, who grow 70% of the food consumed on this planet in non agri-business conditions, well suited to teaching the rest of us how to return to the land. Return to the maize.

Mr. Esteva also noted that the biggest crisis facing humanity is our collective lack of imagination.  We need new ways to solve big problems. In other words, we need some moral innovation. Less big business, more subsistence plus (way down on this page). Basically subsistence plus is "a new approach to ending hunger and impoverishment while protecting small-scale farmers and the environment" (from the link). It is a concept developed by prominent Canadian intellectuals and food activists Wayne Roberts and Michael Sacco (who is also the founder and owner of Chocosol). Their approach is truly imaginative and I'll be writing more about it on my Lettuce Connect blog in the coming weeks as part of my newly launched series on the Cupcake Economy.

Click image to join the newly created Food Justice community on Google+

#OccupyEarth Pledge

1. I promise to actively pursue the creation of a local community council (representing 200-2000 people in my same geographical proximity...one building or one block or one suburban/rural area).   I also promise to serve as an actively engaged member for at least 3 years of my life (in flexible allotments/commitment times).  An upper maximum allowed to serve on council  might be for 10 or 15 years but only in 3 year consecutive allotments   Democratic process should  provide for the mechanisms to create and pay for this type of civic structure.  All of the numbers are arguable....the point is to engage the citizenry and make it easy to be heard.
2. I promise to ensure that Zero Carbon Footprints should be embedded in policy.  At each and every level of government.  And, in your household - use carbon offsetting donations if you cannot go offgrid.
3. I promise to share what I can and when I can:  money; food; time; resources.
4. I promise to be emotionally available and actively listen.  I will actively pursue real (face to face) connections frequently.  The goal is daily (and very flexible).
5. I will honour my body and it's need for healthy fresh food, rest, and exercise.  The goal is daily and also very flexible.

Social Media and Reputation Economics

Social media.  It's an oxymoron.  The only thing that distinguishes today's media from the past, and therefore deeming it 'social', is that we can respond immediately.  Letters posted in the 19th century (and earlier) were also social media.  As were the cave drawings in Europe from 32,000 years ago.

I believe that today's social media has allowed us to bypass the knowledge economy and move directly into a more transparent reputation economy.  It is not what you know, it is who you know.  The promise of an economy growing according to [knowledge generated] patents does not get very far without the money to build, test, market and improve said patented item.  And where does the money come from?  According to the Occupy Wall Street movement, the money belongs to only 1% of the population.  So if you've got a great idea you are going to have to gain access to some of that wealth in order to generate wealth with that idea.  And that, my friends, is where reputation is key.

I spent many years pursuing a doctoral degree.  The brick wall I came up against while researching my topic (Investment Decision Making in New Technologies) was the fact that time and time again the venture capitalists and the angel investors were not modelling anything when making these decisions.  It was the handshake and the reputation that sealed the deals.  To be sure, a thorough examination of the knowledge aspects were part of the due diligence process.   But the final decision came down to the handshake and the reputation of the development team.  This reality, as well as the chaos of my personal life, forced the ending of this academic route since handshakes are not only difficult to measure but a dissertation on the 'soft' aspects of investment decision making was not likely to be easily defended in an engineering faculty.

I learned a lot about communication networks in this field of study.  I've even published on the matter.  The idea of lead users is quite compelling and feeds nicely into the foundation of a reputation economy.  With social media you no longer have to rely on face to face connections or peruse trade magazines and conferences.  If you have an idea, you can actively search online for people looking for solutions that fit your idea.  Or conversely, if you have a problem you can look for ideas that solve it.

And how does the 'wheat get separated from the chaff'?  Reputation.  And this is greatly eased by the immediacy of social media.  Letters of introduction are no longer needed (my father brought a few with him when he emigrated to Canada from Ireland in 1967).  Answers to questions like:  How many twitter followers does the person have?;  LinkedIn connections?;  Blog traffic?;  Youtube videos?; Conference presentations?;  TED talks?; will allow a potential investor to ascertain quickly whether there is enough 'klout' to warrant further investigation or a seed investment.

The sad thing about bypassing the knowledge economy is that there might be some truly great ideas out there that will go nowhere in the reputation economy.  The world transformed itself in the space of a mere decade, leaving knowledge junkies like myself hankering a bit for a bygone era and resigned to blogging for a better world.  A 3.0 world where reputation is based on quality rather than merely quantity.