Posted by Dr. Bob on September 21, 2013, at 2:51:12
In reply to Re: the commons, posted by alexandra_k on September 20, 2013, at 18:29:37
> it takes time and effort to punish defectors - and one runs the risk of the defector retaliating.
>
> i guess that is what can be nice about having a leader. someone else to bear the cost of punishment.I'm reminded of something Twinleaf posted recently on Admin:
> > The history of sharing leadership with you -i.e. the deputies - has been unexpectedly negative
--
> in order for there to be a tragedy of the commons there needs to be:
>
> - a commons. a space. i think we can grant that message boards are a space / place in a sense.
>
> - the space to be finite in some way. for there to be competition. with respect to either something that can be got out of the space (a resource) or with respect to ones representation in the space (like bacteria populating a fixed size petrie dish with unlimited food supply). like... having posts in the unarchived space? perhaps... having people respond to your posts? perhaps... what, exactly? this is interesting...
>
> - the possibility of getting more of the above in a way that stabotages the possibility? liklihood? of others getting that. and... of yourself getting that (over the longer term)It was interesting to take a look at the 1968 article by Garrett Hardin in Science. In addition to the points you've already made:
> > natural selection favors the forces of psychological denial (8). The individual benefits as an individual from his ability to deny the truth even though society as a whole, of which he is a part, suffers.
> >
> > Education can counteract the natural tendency to do the wrong thing, but the inexorable succession of generations requires that the basis for this knowledge be constantly refreshed.
> >
> > In a reverse way, the tragedy of the commons reappears in problems of pollution. Here it is not a question of taking something out of the commons, but of putting something in--sewage, or chemical, radioactive, and heat wastes into water; noxious and dangerous fumes into the air, and distracting and unpleasant advertising signs into the line of sight. The calculations of utility are much the same as before. The rational man finds that his share of the cost of the wastes he discharges into the commons is less than the cost of purifying his wastes before releasing them. Since this is true for everyone, we are locked into a system of "fouling our own nest," so long as we behave only as independent, rational, free-enterprisers.
> >
> > The social arrangements that produce responsibility are arrangements that create coercion, of some sort.
> >
> > Taxing is a good coercive device. To keep downtown shoppers temperate in their use of parking space we introduce parking meters for short periods, and traffic fines for longer ones. We need not actually forbid a citizen to park as long as he wants to; we need merely make it increasingly expensive for him to do so. Not prohibition, but carefully biased options are what we offer him.
> >
> > To many, the word coercion implies arbitrary decisions of distant and irresponsible bureaucrats; but this is not a necessary part of its meaning. The only kind of coercion I recommend is mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon by the majority of the people affected.
> >
> > To say that we mutually agree to coercion is not to say that we are required to enjoy it, or even to pretend we enjoy it. Who enjoys taxes? We all grumble about them. But we accept compulsory taxes because we recognize that voluntary taxes would favor the conscienceless. We institute and (grumblingly) support taxes and other coercive devices to escape the horror of the commons.http://www.sciencemag.org/content/162/3859/1243.full
> insofar as the internet is a commons the problem is... the sh*t that the masses contribute. that takes so very much time... to sort though.
> a lot of other message boards you can put a lot of time and energy into thoughtful responses to particular individuals - and not even get any acknowledgement back. or get dismissive acknowledgement.
What I had in mind originally wasn't how many posts were posted, but what kind. The issues Hardin grouped under the heading "pollution".
Bob
a brilliant and reticent Web mastermind -- The New York Times
backpedals well -- PartlyCloudy
poster:Dr. Bob
thread:1047868
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20130914/msgs/1051071.html