Back to individualism

1 view
Skip to first unread message

Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 4, 2007, 12:54:40 PM2/4/07
to KnowledgePersons
Hi,

as I can see the networked goods and services are not of interest to
you. Right? You probably don't have or don't want to share the ideas
to establish the project.

I think it's because you're practicing them (off-line activity has
many examples and the web is just a form of representation of them or
is for the additional connections and feedback) or you're here in
order to watch Knowledge Persons and such the observers will never be
of assistance here ... - it's their right and their business. Let it
be.

Anyway this is a confirmation that the connections and projects start
from the smart individuals willing to connect. No refined structure
can't substitute individuals, though their separation can be a
problem.

Therefore Knowledge Persons' group will probably be distributed into
various groups or individually dispersed - who are the formal members
and and who are the joint project makers or individual project makers.
It's evolution. I plan to stay as a hub for related content while I
can understand of who Knowledge Persons are or must be.

For those who seeks for a space for consulting, please read:

http://knowledgeperson.blogspot.com/2007/02/space-for-consulting.html

By the way I was asked to open the members list. What do you think?

Nikolay

christopher macrae

unread,
Feb 4, 2007, 1:23:48 PM2/4/07
to Knowledg...@googlegroups.com
Hello Agent Provocateur
 
I am delighted to share knowhow about seeing through networks as long as we take a context and communally start to map it. I do not believe there is some overarching standard that will be reached without context and map. Since I missed any mails suggesting that we were communally gathering around a context,  I have been working on open source netowrk maps with other groups.
 
Yes as far as I am concerend - opening up details on membership is fine
 
chris macrae
http://worldcitizen.tv

Nikolay Kryachkov <n...@au.ru> wrote:

Now you can scan emails quickly with a reading pane. Get the new Yahoo! Mail.

Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 4, 2007, 3:13:30 PM2/4/07
to KnowledgePersons
Chris,

sharing know-how is OK and you confirmed that you're working with
other networks and I only underlined such the possibilities. Nothing
wrong, I think.

Also it would be good to see here your map project in progress (if
possible). Or if you have the RSS link you can give it, if you want.

You don't miss the mails that we are gathered around the context,
except Knowledge Person concept. But when I started the project, Dave
Snowden, for example, suggested 'un-knowledge logo' - see

http://www.cognitive-edge.com/2006/09/hippocrates_has_more_than_an_o.php

http://knowledgeperson.blogspot.com/2006/09/generalizing-complexity-simplicity-for.html

http://groups.google.com/group/Value-Networks/browse_thread/thread/95b6d2f50197fd4d/82c4536b43c8846a?q=Complexity+or+simplicity%3F&lnk=ol&

The difference is that I represent myself. I remember that someone
from your, Chris, network (in Russia) told me that I'm from KGB and
after some email exchange with me she apologized.

Agent Provocateur? It sounds like you missed the point probably
thinking that there is no room for independence and everything is
under control in Big Brother style (it was a story about future of
England), and cold war is probably still in you head and manage you.

Who thinks what regarding open membership or would like to add any
comments?

Nikolay


On Feb 4, 9:23 pm, christopher macrae <chris.mac...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:

> ---------------------------------

Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 4, 2007, 3:19:33 PM2/4/07
to KnowledgePersons
I wanted to say that we are not gathered around context, we are around
Knowledge Person concept.

On Feb 4, 11:13 pm, "Nikolay Kryachkov" <n...@au.ru> wrote:
> Chris,
>
> sharing know-how is OK and you confirmed that you're working with
> other networks and I only underlined such the possibilities. Nothing
> wrong, I think.
>
> Also it would be good to see here your map project in progress (if
> possible). Or if you have the RSS link you can give it, if you want.
>
> You don't miss the mails that we are gathered around the context,
> except Knowledge Person concept. But when I started the project, Dave
> Snowden, for example, suggested 'un-knowledge logo' - see
>
> http://www.cognitive-edge.com/2006/09/hippocrates_has_more_than_an_o.php
>

> http://knowledgeperson.blogspot.com/2006/09/generalizing-complexity-s...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/Value-Networks/browse_thread/thread/95...

christopher macrae

unread,
Feb 4, 2007, 3:37:20 PM2/4/07
to Knowledg...@googlegroups.com
Nikolay I am not aware that I know anyone in Russia apart from you; so I am suprised to hear that a fellow networker of mine once called you a KGB networker - tell me at chris....@yahoo.co.uk if I need to know who that was
 
By agent provocateur, I simply meant that I assumed that several people in this group are interested and that your mail was in effect demanding that we correspond more often. I apologise; I realise that it may have sounded more of a sinister appelation than I had intended.
 
A NETWORK MAP WE ARE BUILDING
I don't know if this is a map that will interest you are not. I have several friends who are trying to continually update a map on where citizen hubs exist. By hubs we mean: community centres founded by people (not governments) so that we can get on with social entrepreneur of other sustainability projects that need empowering from the grassroots up, or to offer access to lifelong learning to specific segments in the community who might otherwise fail to integrate, or fall through social nets    
 
Hubs come in various forms such as Brazil's Rio's http://www.catcomm.org and London Islington's
http://www.the-hub.net/
 
WHO DO FRIENDS INCLUDE
 
Publishers of a travel guide to CrisisLearning which will be coming out in a few weeks. The editor is specifically doing an article on some of her favourite hubs which she has spotted around Europe as a person who does a lot of open space and other hosting
 
PASSPORTS TO SUSTAINABILITY
Towards the end of March a Lonndon-Europe group called the Espians are starting a 24 day virtual deb ate on the climate crisis; one of whose ongoing solutions is to en sure that citizens keep on askin g questions about this and sharing sustainability knowledge for the next 5 years. This debate also launches a daily goal. Helping to plant 24 city hubs around the world is one of the day's goals
 
cheers
chris macrae
more on some of the above at http://worldcitizen.tv  and http://passports.jp
Nikolay Kryachkov <n...@au.ru> wrote:

Chris,

sharing know-how is OK and you confirmed that you're working with
other networks and I only underlined such the possibilities. Nothing
wrong, I think.

Also it would be good to see here your map project in progress (if
possible). Or if you have the RSS link you can give it, if you want.

You don't miss the mails that we are gathered around the context,
except Knowledge Person concept. But when I started the project, Dave
Snowden, for example, suggested 'un-knowledge logo' - see

http://www.cognitive-edge.com/2006/09/hippocrates_has_more_than_an_o.php

http://knowledgeperson.blogspot.com/2006/09/generalizing-complexity-simplicity-for.html

http://groups.google.com/group/Value-Networks/browse_thread/thread/95b6d2f50197fd4d/82c4536b43c8846a?q=Complexity+or+simplicity%3F&lnk=ol&

The difference is that I represent myself. I remember that someone
from your, Chris, network (in Russia) told me that I'm from KGB and
after some email exchange with me she apologized.

Agent Provocateur? It sounds like you missed the point probably
thinking that there is no room for independence and everything is
under control in Big Brother style (it was a story about future of
England), and cold war is probably still in you head and manage you.

Who thinks what regarding open membership or would like to add any
comments?

Nikolay


On Feb 4, 9:23 pm, christopher macrae
wrote:
> Hello Agent Provocateur
>
> I am delighted to share knowhow about seeing through networks as long as we take a context and communally start to map it. I do not believe there is some overarching standard that will be reached without context and map. Since I missed any mails suggesting that we were communally gathering around a context, I have been working on open source netowrk maps with other groups.
>
> Yes as far as I am concerend - opening up details on membership is fine
>
> chris macrae
> http://worldcitizen.tv
>

Inbox full of unwanted email? Get leading protection and 1GB storage with All New Yahoo! Mail.

Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 5, 2007, 1:30:45 AM2/5/07
to KnowledgePersons
Chris I can't demand. Posting here isn't an obligation. I only said
how it is from my viewpoint and will be, perhaps. You gave the links
and Knowledge Persons can read ...

Regarding opening the membership list I think those who wanted to be
open here did that or will do, others have right to keep privacy.

And about 'agent provocateur' - we eliminated a text virus.

Nikolay

On Feb 4, 11:37 pm, christopher macrae <chris.mac...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
> Nikolay I am not aware that I know anyone in Russia apart from you; so I am suprised to hear that a fellow networker of mine once called you a KGB networker - tell me at chris.mac...@yahoo.co.uk if I need to know who that was


>
> By agent provocateur, I simply meant that I assumed that several people in this group are interested and that your mail was in effect demanding that we correspond more often. I apologise; I realise that it may have sounded more of a sinister appelation than I had intended.
>
> A NETWORK MAP WE ARE BUILDING
> I don't know if this is a map that will interest you are not. I have several friends who are trying to continually update a map on where citizen hubs exist. By hubs we mean: community centres founded by people (not governments) so that we can get on with social entrepreneur of other sustainability projects that need empowering from the grassroots up, or to offer access to lifelong learning to specific segments in the community who might otherwise fail to integrate, or fall through social nets
>

> Hubs come in various forms such as Brazil's Rio'shttp://www.catcomm.organd London Islington'shttp://www.the-hub.net/


>
> WHO DO FRIENDS INCLUDE
>
> Publishers of a travel guide to CrisisLearning which will be coming out in a few weeks. The editor is specifically doing an article on some of her favourite hubs which she has spotted around Europe as a person who does a lot of open space and other hosting
>
> PASSPORTS TO SUSTAINABILITY
> Towards the end of March a Lonndon-Europe group called the Espians are starting a 24 day virtual deb ate on the climate crisis; one of whose ongoing solutions is to en sure that citizens keep on askin g questions about this and sharing sustainability knowledge for the next 5 years. This debate also launches a daily goal. Helping to plant 24 city hubs around the world is one of the day's goals
>
> cheers
> chris macrae

> more on some of the above athttp://worldcitizen.tv andhttp://passports.jp


>
> Nikolay Kryachkov <n...@au.ru> wrote:
>
> Chris,
>
> sharing know-how is OK and you confirmed that you're working with
> other networks and I only underlined such the possibilities. Nothing
> wrong, I think.
>
> Also it would be good to see here your map project in progress (if
> possible). Or if you have the RSS link you can give it, if you want.
>
> You don't miss the mails that we are gathered around the context,
> except Knowledge Person concept. But when I started the project, Dave
> Snowden, for example, suggested 'un-knowledge logo' - see
>
> http://www.cognitive-edge.com/2006/09/hippocrates_has_more_than_an_o.php
>

> http://knowledgeperson.blogspot.com/2006/09/generalizing-complexity-s...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/Value-Networks/browse_thread/thread/95...

> ---------------------------------

christopher macrae

unread,
Feb 5, 2007, 9:49:35 AM2/5/07
to Knowledg...@googlegroups.com
Nikolay
 
thank you for pointing me to the literary description of knowledge person; it seems good to me; perhaps it should be at the bottom of each group mail like a signature
 
if I understood the definition, it seems to raise the question of each of us- what knowledge do we have that we want to share in practical projects which could be partly or wholly open sourced
 
Nikolay, apart from text virus, do you have any other knowledge streams (I ask because whilst I am not disinterested in text virus, my prior attempts to extend its flow to others have not gone anywhere - presumably because I don't actually have personal acquaintances who feel like being clients of text virus)
 
my interests in knowledge include:
 
cm1 identifying any crises that could exponentially compound the end of humanity, and who is not just debating these as citizens but trying out empowerment solutions (ie ones that need to be done locally and then open sourced interlocally)- for 24 years now (my family being the first to publish a world is flat (or death of distance) future history http://futurehistory.jp back in 1984) I have been connected with debates that suggest that system  transformation to include every locality fairly in globalisation involves at least 7 sustainability crises - more details of themes at http://worldcitizen.tv  http://worldeconomist.net
 
cm2 one of the 7 crises is learning, and I have come across a most empowering method for children to learn; another crisis is poverty, where the best solution I have so far discovered appears to be microcredit...
 
cm3 in terms of methods that connect contexts:  I am interested in what system methods interface all other system methods; I find at least 90% of so-called system experts do not openly interface their method with others and there contravene some of the key principles of the maths of true systems theory
 
true approaches to systems need to be so simple that everyone who is connected by the system can use them; I believe a true map is one such method; while there are others, knowledge of mapping (applied not to geographies but to networks, organisations, dynamics of global markets etc) is something I am here to exchange if anyone is interested
 
cm4 I am also interested in valuing trust as a flow; when I moderated the special interest group of knowledgeboard.com on emotional intelligence, the consequences were not too good for me because a few of the administrators of knowledgeboard had exactly the opposite valuations of trust than I hold; so its clearly a subject that is segmented in various ways including how much power a person has to boss others; I come with my father's truth entrepreneurial beliefs that in true service and knowledge economies we need to end 20th century systems of bossing http://www.normanmacrae.com/intrapreneur.html
 
cheers
chris macrae
http://macrae.tv exploring family trees as the primary collaboration source of productivity


New Yahoo! Mail is the ultimate force in competitive emailing. Find out more at the Yahoo! Mail Championships. Plus: play games and win prizes.

Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 5, 2007, 2:28:41 PM2/5/07
to KnowledgePersons
Let me think, Chris.

Nikolay

On Feb 5, 5:49 pm, christopher macrae <chris.mac...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:


> Nikolay
>
> thank you for pointing me to the literary description of knowledge person; it seems good to me; perhaps it should be at the bottom of each group mail like a signature
>
> if I understood the definition, it seems to raise the question of each of us- what knowledge do we have that we want to share in practical projects which could be partly or wholly open sourced
>
> Nikolay, apart from text virus, do you have any other knowledge streams (I ask because whilst I am not disinterested in text virus, my prior attempts to extend its flow to others have not gone anywhere - presumably because I don't actually have personal acquaintances who feel like being clients of text virus)
>
> my interests in knowledge include:
>

> cm1 identifying any crises that could exponentially compound the end of humanity, and who is not just debating these as citizens but trying out empowerment solutions (ie ones that need to be done locally and then open sourced interlocally)- for 24 years now (my family being the first to publish a world is flat (or death of distance) future historyhttp://futurehistory.jpback in 1984) I have been connected with debates that suggest that system transformation to include every locality fairly in globalisation involves at least 7 sustainability crises - more details of themes athttp://worldcitizen.tv http://worldeconomist.net


>
> cm2 one of the 7 crises is learning, and I have come across a most empowering method for children to learn; another crisis is poverty, where the best solution I have so far discovered appears to be microcredit...
>
> cm3 in terms of methods that connect contexts: I am interested in what system methods interface all other system methods; I find at least 90% of so-called system experts do not openly interface their method with others and there contravene some of the key principles of the maths of true systems theory
>
> true approaches to systems need to be so simple that everyone who is connected by the system can use them; I believe a true map is one such method; while there are others, knowledge of mapping (applied not to geographies but to networks, organisations, dynamics of global markets etc) is something I am here to exchange if anyone is interested
>

> cm4 I am also interested in valuing trust as a flow; when I moderated the special interest group of knowledgeboard.com on emotional intelligence, the consequences were not too good for me because a few of the administrators of knowledgeboard had exactly the opposite valuations of trust than I hold; so its clearly a subject that is segmented in various ways including how much power a person has to boss others; I come with my father's truth entrepreneurial beliefs that in true service and knowledge economies we need to end 20th century systems of bossinghttp://www.normanmacrae.com/intrapreneur.html
>
> cheers
> chris macrae
> http://macrae.tvexploring family trees as the primary collaboration source of productivity
>
> ---------------------------------

Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 6, 2007, 8:18:29 AM2/6/07
to KnowledgePersons
> > thank you for pointing me to the literary description of knowledge person; it seems good to me; perhaps it should be at the bottom of each group mail like a signature


Thanks Chris for suggesting that - I've added a link:

Who Knowledge Persons are
http://knowledgeperson.blogspot.com/2006/12/knowledge-persons-are-
individuals-in.html

to the group emails foot.

There is a small Russian market for explaining text viruses and
related topics like collaborative self-consulting among some business
people, system analysts and MBA students.

If fact many knowledge streams except text viruses are and will be
interconnected. Many of them are known from my previous posts:

1) Learning - 10-12 years in school and + 5 years in university + MBA
+ PhD is nonsense now not only because of fast changes, but because of
such a system revolves social separation and poverty in result. A
possible alternative is not studying facts, but studying an invariant
picture of the world, which can be easily filled by facts during self-
education and practice. It's about common interface to knowledge.

2) Credit money will never solve the problem of poverty, I think.
Instead of wasting time and looking for loans it's better to spend
time for making money. If goods exist, it's better to sell them or
assist in selling. And since descriptions are the part of any goods
and services copyright can be a source of money stream for the tree of
authors with the original and derivative works. I don't understand
disconnection and freedom from money for authors in current open
source or FSF style licensing projects as well as 'money first -
content second' approaches. It's good for credit money system and
probably for dynamite creator prize, not for authors and solving the
problem of poverty. I was criticised at opensource.org that my
licensing model may give much money, but it would be good for authors
and future knowledge money: http://knowledgeperson.blogspot.com/
2006/10/knowledge-money-will-be-yours.html

3) Fashion: it's good for common knowledge interface too. I tried to
get any feed-back with Knowledge Person concept at http://medinge.org
which was founded by you, Chris. No replies. I don't blame you, Chris,
and them; they are busy people. Today I found KnowledgePerson.com as #
1 web site at Google if to search 'knowledge person' and think that
over time smart people will benefit with a network of conceptual brand
stores and I'll assist them with descriptions and in representing all
the networking Knowledge Persons involved in the particular goods (raw
materials producers, designers, manufacturers, sellers ... even
customers with their advices - not a corporation, but a smart network
of ONE level collaboration). Unfortunately all this wasn't with me
when I personally met Mohan Murjani in Moscow many years ago (a brand
maker of Tommy Hilfiger, Gloria Vanderbild, Lois, etc. http://
www.investmentinfo.co.uk/news/IIAAAFHN.shtml ) and had the
conversations with him - at least to get a feed-back.

4) Trust: it's a "best selling" endless topic for KM people. I can't
understand - is trust a substitution of knowledge - you don't know and
are forced to trust or what? A person which name was Stalin said -
trust, but verify - and in this case it doesn't matter who Stalin was.
What if I tell you that with a text virus concept is possible to
measure understanding of texts? If only, say, 10% is understandable
(risk of misunderstanding is 90%) will you seriously talk about trust?
You can read more about what I (and not only) think about KM at http://
knowledgeperson.blogspot.com/2006/11/knowledge-management-at-
crossroads.html

Another option is a sort of knowledge exchange/fixing and business
openness rating project. We discussed it at knowledgeboard with you
Chris. Imagine a connection of a google finance style diagram which
values are connected with what a corporation and bloggers say in order
to allow ordinary people to influence market without money. No
problems with gossips. Corporate PR officers can respond. The
corporation doesn't want to participate? OK. They may find themselves
with zero rating of openness at this media. This option may
interconnect with text virus measurement over time, I suppose.

So, there are many things to say about knowledge streams except all
this. But I think it's enough for now.

Nikolay

On Feb 5, 10:28 pm, "Nikolay Kryachkov" <n...@au.ru> wrote:
> Let me think, Chris.
>
> Nikolay
>
> On Feb 5, 5:49 pm, christopher macrae <chris.mac...@yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> > Nikolay
>
> > thank you for pointing me to the literary description of knowledge person; it seems good to me; perhaps it should be at the bottom of each group mail like a signature
>
> > if I understood the definition, it seems to raise the question of each of us- what knowledge do we have that we want to share in practical projects which could be partly or wholly open sourced
>
> > Nikolay, apart from text virus, do you have any other knowledge streams (I ask because whilst I am not disinterested in text virus, my prior attempts to extend its flow to others have not gone anywhere - presumably because I don't actually have personal acquaintances who feel like being clients of text virus)
>
> > my interests in knowledge include:
>

> > cm1 identifying any crises that could exponentially compound the end of humanity, and who is not just debating these as citizens but trying out empowerment solutions (ie ones that need to be done locally and then open sourced interlocally)- for 24 years now (my family being the first to publish a world is flat (or death of distance) future historyhttp://futurehistory.jpbackin 1984) I have been connected with debates that suggest that system transformation to include every locality fairly in globalisation involves at least 7 sustainability crises - more details of themes athttp://worldcitizen.tvhttp://worldeconomist.net


>
> > cm2 one of the 7 crises is learning, and I have come across a most empowering method for children to learn; another crisis is poverty, where the best solution I have so far discovered appears to be microcredit...
>
> > cm3 in terms of methods that connect contexts: I am interested in what system methods interface all other system methods; I find at least 90% of so-called system experts do not openly interface their method with others and there contravene some of the key principles of the maths of true systems theory
>
> > true approaches to systems need to be so simple that everyone who is connected by the system can use them; I believe a true map is one such method; while there are others, knowledge of mapping (applied not to geographies but to networks, organisations, dynamics of global markets etc) is something I am here to exchange if anyone is interested
>
> > cm4 I am also interested in valuing trust as a flow; when I moderated the special interest group of knowledgeboard.com on emotional intelligence, the consequences were not too good for me because a few of the administrators of knowledgeboard had exactly the opposite valuations of trust than I hold; so its clearly a subject that is segmented in various ways including how much power a person has to boss others; I come with my father's truth entrepreneurial beliefs that in true service and knowledge economies we need to end 20th century systems of bossinghttp://www.normanmacrae.com/intrapreneur.html
>
> > cheers
> > chris macrae

> > http://macrae.tvexploringfamily trees as the primary collaboration source of productivity

christopher macrae

unread,
Feb 6, 2007, 11:15:00 AM2/6/07
to Knowledg...@googlegroups.com

0 can you give some examples?

related topics like collaborative self-consulting among some business
people, system analysts and MBA students.

If fact many knowledge streams except text viruses are and will be
interconnected. Many of them are known from my previous posts:
What 21st C learning should be is a topic we in London are publishing a learing guide on as I write this. Two ideas that excit me most in this guide:
 
mapping intercity hubs- these are community spaces founded by citizens not governments to fill specific gaps wither in lifelong learning connections or in empowering a subcommunity to sytart orgaising projuects they need or to share access eg to internet; we hope to have a map of about 50 hubs criss-crossing all hempispeheres by end of 2007 - if this topic specifically interests you, I should probably introduce to the espian network on London who will be dbetaing this idea with a million people in a 24 day virtual campaign to interconnect starting in about 6 weeks
 
I have met the family who founded the world's laregst school in India and now have nearly a million alumni who want to serce the world; they have recenetly worked out a most suitable way to use computers to empower the child to self-direct learning and connect with family and teacher in mentoring roles rather than the classic classroom where one teacher tries to direct how all children listen

1) Learning - 10-12 years in school and + 5 years in university + MBA
+ PhD is nonsense now not only because of fast changes, but because of
such a system revolves social separation and poverty in result. A
possible alternative is not studying facts, but studying an invariant
picture of the world, which can be easily filled by facts during self-
education and practice. It's about common interface to knowledge.
 
I believe microcredit eg http://grameen.tv  if one of the revolutions that does work but culturally it assumes that communities it invests in are stable and will exist in the same shape for a long time. It could be that microcredit is hard to grasroot in communal trust in a Russian city but I have never exploered whether that is so 


2) Credit money will never solve the problem of poverty, I think.
Instead of wasting time and looking for loans it's better to spend
time for making money. If goods exist, it's better to sell them or
assist in selling. And since descriptions are the part of any goods
and services copyright can be a source of money stream for the tree of
authors with the original and derivative works. I don't understand
disconnection and freedom from money for authors in current open
source or FSF style licensing projects as well as 'money first -
content second' approaches. It's good for credit money system and
probably for dynamite creator prize, not for authors and solving the
problem of poverty. I was criticised at opensource.org that my
licensing model may give much money, but it would be good for authors
and future knowledge money: http://knowledgeperson.blogspot.com/
2006/10/knowledge-money-will-be-yours.html
 
Just like bossy people took over knowledgeoard.com and said that thye had no room for my entreprenurial style of connecting; ditto at medinge.org; for some reason I am excluded from what I was th joint founders of but equally those who have taken over this knowledge space now manipulate the subject of branding in largely the opposite way to that which I believe is multiplies value for peoples 


3) Fashion: it's good for common knowledge interface too. I tried to
get any feed-back with Knowledge Person concept at http://medinge.org
which was founded by you, Chris. No replies. I don't blame you, Chris,
and them; they are busy people. Today I found KnowledgePerson.com as #
1 web site at Google if to search 'knowledge person' and think that
over time smart people will benefit with a network of conceptual brand
stores and I'll assist them with descriptions and in representing all
the networking Knowledge Persons involved in the particular goods (raw
materials producers, designers, manufacturers, sellers ... even
customers with their advices - not a corporation, but a smart network
of ONE level collaboration). Unfortunately all this wasn't with me
when I personally met Mohan Murjani in Moscow many years ago (a brand
maker of Tommy Hilfiger, Gloria Vanderbild, Lois, etc. http://
www.investmentinfo.co.uk/news/IIAAAFHN.shtml ) and had the
conversations with him - at least to get a feed-back.
 
I believe most KM people systematically destroy trust. You should note that eg Drucker defined knowledge concepts empowerment's  opposite way round from most knowledge management people. Nothing (GWB excepted) is worse for degrading trust-flow around Europe or the world than that sickness of KM which the Europe Union tries to force feed from the top of its power b rokers, at least imo


4) Trust: it's a "best selling" endless topic for KM people. I can't
understand - is trust a substitution of knowledge - you don't know and
are forced to trust or what? A person which name was Stalin said -
trust, but verify - and in this case it doesn't matter who Stalin was.
What if I tell you that with a text virus concept is possible to
measure understanding of texts? If only, say, 10% is understandable
(risk of misunderstanding is 90%) will you seriously talk about trust?
You can read more about what I (and not only) think about KM at http://
knowledgeperson.blogspot.com/2006/11/knowledge-management-at-
crossroads.html


Web email has come of age. Don't settle for less than the All New Yahoo! Mail.

Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 6, 2007, 1:49:47 PM2/6/07
to KnowledgePersons
An example: an old link

http://www.hes.spb.ru/03_29.htm of http://www.hes.spb.ru

currently I use

http://knowledgeperson.com/how.html and work on its second version.

>I should probably introduce to the espian network on London who ...

Can you give me a link to learn more?

>From my viewpoint community will not work in Russia. An annual average
growth in banking sector, if I remember correctly, is 30-40%
especially in home credit and mortgage sectors. People take, take ....
loans. After that (when banks will have problems with low liquid
assets) other investors will emerge or will come from outside -
someone like http://www.hudson-advisors.com ...

>ditto at medinge.org; for some reason I am excluded from what
>I was th joint founders of but equally those who have taken over
>this knowledge space now manipulate the subject of branding in
>largely the opposite way to that which I believe is multiplies value
>for peoples

Why they use your name, Chris?

What is GWB?

So I think I was right saying - back to individualism or wrong?

Nikolay


On Feb 6, 7:15 pm, christopher macrae <chris.mac...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:


> 0 can you give some examples?
> related topics like collaborative self-consulting among some business
> people, system analysts and MBA students.
>
> If fact many knowledge streams except text viruses are and will be
> interconnected. Many of them are known from my previous posts:
>
> What 21st C learning should be is a topic we in London are publishing a learing guide on as I write this. Two ideas that excit me most in this guide:
>
> mapping intercity hubs- these are community spaces founded by citizens not governments to fill specific gaps wither in lifelong learning connections or in empowering a subcommunity to sytart orgaising projuects they need or to share access eg to internet; we hope to have a map of about 50 hubs criss-crossing all hempispeheres by end of 2007 - if this topic specifically interests you, I should probably introduce to the espian network on London who will be dbetaing this idea with a million people in a 24 day virtual campaign to interconnect starting in about 6 weeks
>
> I have met the family who founded the world's laregst school in India and now have nearly a million alumni who want to serce the world; they have recenetly worked out a most suitable way to use computers to empower the child to self-direct learning and connect with family and teacher in mentoring roles rather than the classic classroom where one teacher tries to direct how all children listen
>
> 1) Learning - 10-12 years in school and + 5 years in university + MBA
> + PhD is nonsense now not only because of fast changes, but because of
> such a system revolves social separation and poverty in result. A
> possible alternative is not studying facts, but studying an invariant
> picture of the world, which can be easily filled by facts during self-
> education and practice. It's about common interface to knowledge.
>

> I believe microcredit eghttp://grameen.tv if one of the revolutions that does work but culturally it assumes that communities it invests in are stable and will exist in the same shape for a long time. It could be that microcredit is hard to grasroot in communal trust in a Russian city but I have never exploered whether that is so


>
> 2) Credit money will never solve the problem of poverty, I think.
> Instead of wasting time and looking for loans it's better to spend
> time for making money. If goods exist, it's better to sell them or
> assist in selling. And since descriptions are the part of any goods
> and services copyright can be a source of money stream for the tree of
> authors with the original and derivative works. I don't understand
> disconnection and freedom from money for authors in current open
> source or FSF style licensing projects as well as 'money first -
> content second' approaches. It's good for credit money system and
> probably for dynamite creator prize, not for authors and solving the
> problem of poverty. I was criticised at opensource.org that my
> licensing model may give much money, but it would be good for authors
> and future knowledge money:http://knowledgeperson.blogspot.com/
> 2006/10/knowledge-money-will-be-yours.html
>
> Just like bossy people took over knowledgeoard.com and said that thye had no room for my entreprenurial style of connecting; ditto at medinge.org; for some reason I am excluded from what I was th joint founders of but equally those who have taken over this knowledge space now manipulate the subject of branding in largely the opposite way to that which I believe is multiplies value for peoples
>
> 3) Fashion: it's good for common knowledge interface too. I tried to

> get any feed-back with Knowledge Person concept athttp://medinge.org


> which was founded by you, Chris. No replies. I don't blame you, Chris,
> and them; they are busy people. Today I found KnowledgePerson.com as #
> 1 web site at Google if to search 'knowledge person' and think that
> over time smart people will benefit with a network of conceptual brand
> stores and I'll assist them with descriptions and in representing all
> the networking Knowledge Persons involved in the particular goods (raw
> materials producers, designers, manufacturers, sellers ... even
> customers with their advices - not a corporation, but a smart network
> of ONE level collaboration). Unfortunately all this wasn't with me
> when I personally met Mohan Murjani in Moscow many years ago (a brand

> maker of Tommy Hilfiger, Gloria Vanderbild, Lois, etc. http://www.investmentinfo.co.uk/news/IIAAAFHN.shtml) and had the


> conversations with him - at least to get a feed-back.
>
> I believe most KM people systematically destroy trust. You should note that eg Drucker defined knowledge concepts empowerment's opposite way round from most knowledge management people. Nothing (GWB excepted) is worse for degrading trust-flow around Europe or the world than that sickness of KM which the Europe Union tries to force feed from the top of its power b rokers, at least imo
>
> 4) Trust: it's a "best selling" endless topic for KM people. I can't
> understand - is trust a substitution of knowledge - you don't know and
> are forced to trust or what? A person which name was Stalin said -
> trust, but verify - and in this case it doesn't matter who Stalin was.
> What if I tell you that with a text virus concept is possible to
> measure understanding of texts? If only, say, 10% is understandable
> (risk of misunderstanding is 90%) will you seriously talk about trust?
> You can read more about what I (and not only) think about KM at http://
> knowledgeperson.blogspot.com/2006/11/knowledge-management-at-
> crossroads.html
>

> ---------------------------------

Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 6, 2007, 2:07:56 PM2/6/07
to KnowledgePersons
It

>From my viewpoint community will not work in Russia. An annual average

was my statement.

Nikolay

On Feb 6, 9:49 pm, "Nikolay Kryachkov" <n...@au.ru> wrote:
> An example: an old link
>

> http://www.hes.spb.ru/03_29.htmofhttp://www.hes.spb.ru
>
> currently I use
>
> http://knowledgeperson.com/how.htmland work on its second version.

> > I believe microcredit eghttp://grameen.tvif one of the revolutions that does work but culturally it assumes that communities it invests in are stable and will exist in the same shape for a long time. It could be that microcredit is hard to grasroot in communal trust in a Russian city but I have never exploered whether that is so

> > maker of Tommy Hilfiger, Gloria Vanderbild, Lois, etc.http://www.investmentinfo.co.uk/news/IIAAAFHN.shtml) and had the

christopher macrae

unread,
Feb 6, 2007, 4:25:45 PM2/6/07
to Knowledg...@googlegroups.com
In previous mail Nikolai asked:
 
1 why does www.medinge.org use my  name? I am not aware that they do any longer. Please inform if opposite is case.
 
2 who is GWB - sorry I don't thing Pres Bush was worth more than an acronym - I am not being political in  the sense of democratic versus republican, I jst think the guy has lost touch with the world in the same way that Kaiser Wilhelm had about 100 years ago
 
3 It is important to understand that Muhammad Yunus microcredit is in many ways the opposite system of all other banking credit system. It is intent on only lending you the amount needed to entrepreneuruially get started; and to make you responsible top a microcommunity around you to pay your way. It is only offered to the very poorest in society who would not normally be offered loans by banks. http://grameen.tv
 
 


Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 7, 2007, 6:15:30 AM2/7/07
to KnowledgePersons
Chris, I thought that you read A7 at http://www.medinge.org/about.shtml
and as I can understand it was written with respect.

Yes, I can understand this example from

http://www.grameenfoundation.org/what_we_do/microfinance_in_action/

"... a woman may borrow $50 to buy chickens so she can sell eggs. As
the chickens multiply, she will have more eggs to sell. Soon she can
sell the chicks. Each expansion pulls her further from the devastation
of poverty".

It's helpful, no doubt. But let me to ask where is a limit or, in
other words, might these women (their network of 'green' eggs
producers) be more competitive over time than the industrial egg
producers with unhealthy food for their chickens?

Nikolay

On Feb 7, 12:25 am, christopher macrae <chris.mac...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:


> In previous mail Nikolai asked:
>

> 1 why doeswww.medinge.orguse my name? I am not aware that they do any longer. Please inform if opposite is case.


>
> 2 who is GWB - sorry I don't thing Pres Bush was worth more than an acronym - I am not being political in the sense of democratic versus republican, I jst think the guy has lost touch with the world in the same way that Kaiser Wilhelm had about 100 years ago
>
> 3 It is important to understand that Muhammad Yunus microcredit is in many ways the opposite system of all other banking credit system. It is intent on only lending you the amount needed to entrepreneuruially get started; and to make you responsible top a microcommunity around you to pay your way. It is only offered to the very poorest in society who would not normally be offered loans by banks.http://grameen.tv
>

> ---------------------------------

christopher macrae

unread,
Feb 7, 2007, 9:19:39 AM2/7/07
to Knowledg...@googlegroups.com, and...@sustainopreneurship.biz, e...@ecxo.net
Alternative Brand & Knowledge & Collaboration Entrepreneurial Revolution Networks
 
Start up a citzens debate between Russian, East and Western Views of Media and knowledge fallibility
-----------
 
If I am a true knowledge person, then I am interested in Transparency of Brand and Knowledge as truth or trust-flows across boundaries which is where all systems compound most economic risk of externalising
 
 - brand being how wholly/energetically/purposefully we communicate and humanly inter-relate and communally practice our productivites and demands over time, network align deep purpose; knowledge being how both in empowering service 24/7/365 from teams up
and in innovating through conflicts, change, system transparency. Likewise since our first death of distance future history in 1984 (a genre now also known as world is flat) we see networks as the greatest communications crisis ever to hit one generation - requiring sytem transformation and integration worldwide that Einstein doubted man would achieve without blowing herself up. http://futurehistory.jp  You place your bets and takes your choice. Either the next 5 years is the most vital ever for collaborating in sustainability or you can fiffle while every Rome burns. That's how we see The Age of Fallibility and every plummeting trust-  anyway at Passports to Sustainability  http://passports.jp and http://thecooperation.tv and about 30 peoples affiliates I know how to network around from various grasssroots emergencies up 
 
Both brand marketers and knowledge management have great powers in these flows ; and clearly the history of communications power from Stalin/Hitler down shows it can be organised to goodwill or badwill ends ; in between there is system blindness about flows; and long-term if any human relations system (including our maps of networked connecting world) is not relen tlessly measurable to its deepest/contextual purpose every cycle, a blind system compounds the same loss of true purpose and trust-flow as one where power is intentionally being manipulated against most of the people connected by the system (or networks as system*system*system)
 
I started several networks from 1990 on about a second interconnecting type of branding or vision or systemic valuation of deepest sustainable purpose. These are for people who do not see branding primarily as making their separate business case for spending more and more on advertising or other departments executions. World Class Brand Network (including an email I still use wcb...@easynet.co.uk) was named after my first 1990 book; Chief Brand Officers Association was named after those boardroom members who saw brand or marketing as integral to how leadership changes the future for the better. It is true that primarily people in my networks hosted the first 2 annual meetings in Medinge 2001/2. These were just retreats where everyone paid their own way to try and find likeminded networkers. The beginning and end of this venture was the book www.beyond-branding.com We used to have a slogan : we loved brands (how markets remain the only way that truth entreprenurs can serve people's deepest needs) but we also agreed with Naomi Klein of NoLogo that most of the world's biggest brands were systemising loss of trust, compounding loss of sustainability. We wanted to change that by example. Then some more commercial people took over the majority will of Medinge. They did not even inform me what they were doing and as you can see I was never invited to be on the front page of the new medinge.org nor is the centre of gravity of that crowd much ado with what I most want to explore, connect....but then not many people understand compound economics from first pattern ruling principles http://worldeconomist.net there is an awful miseductaion problem as successive 20th C governments of left and righ and centre have used each new medium as a stealth tax against humanity's deepest social and sustainable needs. Show me where a great (freedom, happiness empowering) public servant exists any longer...   show me where globalisations professions still keep hippocratic oaths
 
Though I am no saint, as a matematician I have endlessly come across this sort of battle for greater common good nearly 20 years -working to try to reverse the image-ridden flow in such dreadful places as a Big 5 accountant and a BIg 1 ad adency- and for maore than a decade with almost anything I co-host on web or as a real meetings network. For example I was paid for eighteen months by the world's largest communications agency to host www.brandknowledge.com but then dotcoms imploded and the idea that brand and knowledge might be connected in truth was the first cost-cutting. I hosted one of the first webs a university every put up on brand learning organisations between 1994-1998; then professors changed and took the web down overnight even though it had just reached top of the search engines
 
Similarly when I help get crowds to debate knowledge and emotional intelligence at the EU's www.knowledgeboard.com, non-flow bureaucrats take over and throw me out for trying to interface too many networks to colaborate around knowledge rather than amke it an info-tech's separation haven
 
At the end of the day, brand, knowledge all human and interdisciplinary flows that sustain a system's deepest purpose are wholly misvalued by current accounting and all metrics currently in monopoly use by management. For example even though goodwill is the majority part of the market value of any company in the service economy, accountants separate all the parts of this into boxes they can measure rather than mapping it as a flow that multiplies more value than parts. unless we change the mathematical way in which the world's largest organisations are valued and measured then noting will, get better worldwide and we will lose sustainability of future generations - whether the first terminal crisis is climate, war, plague, or poverty's terrifying inhumanities to one another I don't know (and anyhow in an increasingly networked world they all are flows to)
 
If you'd like to nominate 5 people whose trust the future of Russia or Eastern Europe most depends on for all people's sustainability, I will try to include them in the open source guidebook and maps that will be made out of http://up200.tv for my father's 85th birthday present next year   http://www.normanmacrae.com/friends.html
 
In a sense every true knowledge person needs to ask how do they collaborate openly with other types of knowledge persons. I am currently mapping the 200 people worth the world trusting most as collaboration and entrepreneurs and change guides in 2008 at http://up200.tv - nominations welcome
 
vote with 1000 people on what sort of brand truth you want http://www.fastcompany.com/poll/?x=573
 
 
 


Nikolay Kryachkov <n...@au.ru> wrote:

Chris, I thought that you read A7 at http://www.medinge.org/about.shtml
and as I can understand it was written with respect.

Yes, I can understand this example from

http://www.grameenfoundation.org/what_we_do/microfinance_in_action/

"... a woman may borrow $50 to buy chickens so she can sell eggs. As
the chickens multiply, she will have more eggs to sell. Soon she can
sell the chicks. Each expansion pulls her further from the devastation
of poverty".

It's helpful, no doubt. But let me to ask where is a limit or, in
other words, might these women (their network of 'green' eggs
producers) be more competitive over time than the industrial egg
producers with unhealthy food for their chickens?

Nikolay

On Feb 7, 12:25 am, christopher macrae
wrote:
> In previous mail Nikolai asked:
>
> 1 why does www.medinge.org use my name? I am not aware that they do any longer. Please inform if opposite is case.

>
> 2 who is GWB - sorry I don't thing Pres Bush was worth more than an acronym - I am not being political in the sense of democratic versus republican, I jst think the guy has lost touch with the world in the same way that Kaiser Wilhelm had about 100 years ago
 
10 Years Ago:

>
UKRAINE
From Valentin Pertsiya
1) In April some issues of the newspaper I assume to tell about a retails brand (private labels). Could not you recommend to me the books (issues), in which the basic information about retails brand is explained? It would be magnificent, if you also could give me the references on Internet sites, because in our country it is impossible to get the foreign books and heavily to search foreign magazines. 2) My second question concerns the strategy of brand extensions. Some years ago a new firm was started in our country. Idea of its owner - construction of the original franchise. (Today many factories in our country do not work because of various problems). He comes on a factory and speaks: you emit for me the goods (milk - for example), agrees of my design and under my name. After issue of the goods I pay to you minimum money, I take away the goods and I sell it yourself. Now on shelfs of shops there were grocery goods under the name äĎ×ÇÁÎŘ (Dovgan - surname the person who is has invented idea). All goods are emited under one name. Juice äĎ×ÇÁÎŘ, mayonnaise äĎ×ÇÁÎŘ, vodka äĎ×ÇÁÎŘ, beer and water äĎ×ÇÁÎŘ etc. It is clear, that, according to bases of the theory branding, if emit all goods under one name it both facilitates a conclusion new brands and increases probability of origin of problems. Unfortunately, I have not sufficient knowledge in branding area, what to analyse all pluses and minuses of such approach, on a comparison with the approach for example P and G. That is why I ask you and your colleagues on e-mail to help me to analyse marketing policy of äĎ×ÇÁÎŘ.
From Chris Macrae To Valentin, you are raising some enormous subjects (eg I've read many articles on retail brands but never tried a web search for such materials, can anyone else help) and most of all I believe all good brand practice is context specific. So your retailer probably has to work out where on the evolution timeline is your national market:
0) In the beginning most products are of such variable quality or product capability gives such innovation advantages that its best to leave it to manufacturers' brands because else you'll put your retail brand on things that dis-satisfy customers
1) Then it becomes clear that some basic generic products are reliable from batch to batch, and it may make sense for the retailer to often an own label value range on these types of products
2) Then the retailer feels expert enough to juggle how to add value to product sourcing/specification and make its main own label one which directly competes with say the categoty brand leader
3) Then in some categories the retailers' knowledge (eg purchaising data of consumers) and control of supply chain innovates ahead of anything manufcaturer brands can do (some would say that Marks & Spebcers Foods are best in the world in this - but partly they and their supliers have been improving for eg 25 years to get to this stage)
In the above I've tried to simplify the history of retailer branding (but would of course prefer any expery among us to say where I have over-simplified)
When it comes to extending your brand (whether you are retailer, manufacturer brand leader, or manufacturer who supplies a brand steered mainly by the retailer (instead of the consumer) - know whose loyalty of realtionships matter to you. Always extend to something that won't disappoint those who matter most to you, and if your branding is communications led be careful to extend to something whose leadership position as a whole is confirmed by your extension rather than diluted by it Again, if someone's got a simpler starting point, please say . e-mail wcb...@easynet.co.uk

ukr © 1995-8 MELNET : All rights reserved
2006 update:
What the book is about
This book is the first practical guide to brand development in the world.
It appeared in response to an unconscious tactic employed by branding specialists: to conceal the truth about brand creation. Have you ever wondered why there are recommendations for almost everything, from good sex to a good brainstorming session, but no recommendations on consistent brand creation?
However, the reason for the lack of brand creation guides doesn’t matter any more now that this book has been written. Its author sets out the technique of step-by-step creation of working brands which was tried and tested on more than 200 projects within 5 years.
About the authors
Valentin Pertsiya is the CEO and co-owner of BrandAid company (Russia, Ukraine). Under his guidance, the company implemented more than 200 various projects within 5 years. He created a brand development technology that guarantees results. He also created two workshops, “Brand Anatomy” and “Orange Dragon”. Author of the book “Branding: Basic Training” (Peter, 2005).
Lilia Mamleyeva, MBA, Managing Director of BrandAid Ukraine. More than 5 years of experience in brand research. Author of qualitative research techniques. Participated in over 150 projects on brand creation and/or modification. Teacher at several Ukrainian higher education institutions, coach of consumer research in branding.http://book.pertsiya.com/english/


What kind of emailer are you? Find out today - get a free analysis of your email personality. Take the quiz at the Yahoo! Mail Championship.

Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 8, 2007, 4:07:54 AM2/8/07
to KnowledgePersons
I think it's impossible to throw out a fellow Knowledge Person
networker from the 'Knowledge Person' brand project because of the
open nature of such a network.

Consider:

Let's say the 'Knowledge Person' brand project is about business
apparel and accessories. The network is being formed from those who
can connect the parts (material producers, designers, apparel and
accessories producers, media/blog supporters, store operators ...) .

So everyone can put something valuable for the project "on the table".
And the participants can negotiate the conditions. Important that a
banker is needed to collect and distribute the income according the
project agreement.

The difference is the 'Knowledge Person' brand has a meaning and is a
name for an information part of our apparel. This information part can
be represented as a description - who, what, where ... - see
http://knowledgeperson.com (it's my task). And the collaborative self-
consulting framework http://knowledgeperson.com/how.html can be
contributed by me and used to maintain a managerial accounting and S-
curve of competitiveness for the project.

I think that all this is not about investing as usual with the
speculation purposes. The project cash flow is different - almost zero
money investments from the whole project perspective (because every
part of the project belongs to its owner and only this owner decides
what he/she invests and how much) and the gained results are for
distribution.

The market can be, in Russia, for instance. The growth of our rich
people is not a secret and the goods of the best quality, open to
understand and therefore attractive (I think so) can be a subject even
for luxury market where price is the second question.

If that is correct, 'Knowledge Person' brand goods & services project
might act as a global budget for redistribution of wealth to a certain
extent.

Is there a map of the Persons who could form the project, including
the banker?

Regarding 'Dovgan' brand in Russia you can read at

http://sgibnev.ru/?/Edelstar/dovgan/

The article said that Vladimir Dovgan made big business from zero and
sold it. But I don't see the social meaning behind his name except his
personal success and fall. You can go to any superstore in Russia and
see many brands/names similar to others. The separate personal
business is about separation - you see ONE name and don't see other
participants behind. It's a nature of franchise business. Now,
according the article, V. Dovgan manages an international MLM business
- EDELSTAR.

Another thing is 'Knowledge Person' - it's the name of the networked
goods & services with the Knowledge Persons involved, where the
customer is also included - Knowledge Person.

So, even consumption and wealth redistribution can be marketed.

It's about ONE (not multi) level collaboration.

My question again: is there a map of the Persons who could form the
project, including the banker?

Nikolay


On Feb 7, 5:19 pm, christopher macrae <chris.mac...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:


> Alternative Brand & Knowledge & Collaboration Entrepreneurial Revolution Networks
>
> Start up a citzens debate between Russian, East and Western Views of Media and knowledge fallibility
> -----------
>
> If I am a true knowledge person, then I am interested in Transparency of Brand and Knowledge as truth or trust-flows across boundaries which is where all systems compound most economic risk of externalising
>
> - brand being how wholly/energetically/purposefully we communicate and humanly inter-relate and communally practice our productivites and demands over time, network align deep purpose; knowledge being how both in empowering service 24/7/365 from teams up
> http://www.normanmacrae.com/intrapreneur.html

> and in innovating through conflicts, change, system transparency. Likewise since our first death of distance future history in 1984 (a genre now also known as world is flat) we see networks as the greatest communications crisis ever to hit one generation - requiring sytem transformation and integration worldwide that Einstein doubted man would achieve without blowing herself up.http://futurehistory.jp You place your bets and takes your choice. Either the next 5 years is the most vital ever for collaborating in sustainability or you can fiffle while every Rome burns. That's how we see The Age of Fallibility and every plummeting trust- anyway at Passports to Sustainability http://passports.jpandhttp://thecooperation.tvand about 30 peoples affiliates I know how to network around from various grasssroots emergencies up


>
> Both brand marketers and knowledge management have great powers in these flows ; and clearly the history of communications power from Stalin/Hitler down shows it can be organised to goodwill or badwill ends ; in between there is system blindness about flows; and long-term if any human relations system (including our maps of networked connecting world) is not relen tlessly measurable to its deepest/contextual purpose every cycle, a blind system compounds the same loss of true purpose and trust-flow as one where power is intentionally being manipulated against most of the people connected by the system (or networks as system*system*system)
>

> I started several networks from 1990 on about a second interconnecting type of branding or vision or systemic valuation of deepest sustainable purpose. These are for people who do not see branding primarily as making their separate business case for spending more and more on advertising or other departments executions. World Class Brand Network (including an email I still use wcbn...@easynet.co.uk) was named after my first 1990 book; Chief Brand Officers Association was named after those boardroom members who saw brand or marketing as integral to how leadership changes the future for the better. It is true that primarily people in my networks hosted the first 2 annual meetings in Medinge 2001/2. These were just retreats where everyone paid their own way to try and find likeminded networkers. The beginning and end of this venture was the bookwww.beyond-branding.comWe used to have a slogan : we loved brands (how markets remain the only way that truth entreprenurs can
> serve people's deepest needs) but we also agreed with Naomi Klein of NoLogo that most of the world's biggest brands were systemising loss of trust, compounding loss of sustainability. We wanted to change that by example. Then some more commercial people took over the majority will of Medinge. They did not even inform me what they were doing and as you can see I was never invited to be on the front page of the new medinge.org nor is the centre of gravity of that crowd much ado with what I most want to explore, connect....but then not many people understand compound economics from first pattern ruling principleshttp://worldeconomist.netthere is an awful miseductaion problem as successive 20th C governments of left and righ and centre have used each new medium as a stealth tax against humanity's deepest social and sustainable needs. Show me where a great (freedom, happiness empowering) public servant exists any longer... show me where globalisations professions still keep
> hippocratic oaths
>
> Though I am no saint, as a matematician I have endlessly come across this sort of battle for greater common good nearly 20 years -working to try to reverse the image-ridden flow in such dreadful places as a Big 5 accountant and a BIg 1 ad adency- and for maore than a decade with almost anything I co-host on web or as a real meetings network. For example I was paid for eighteen months by the world's largest communications agency to hostwww.brandknowledge.combut then dotcoms imploded and the idea that brand and knowledge might be connected in truth was the first cost-cutting. I hosted one of the first webs a university every put up on brand learning organisations between 1994-1998; then professors changed and took the web down overnight even though it had just reached top of the search engines
>
> Similarly when I help get crowds to debate knowledge and emotional intelligence at the EU'swww.knowledgeboard.com, non-flow bureaucrats take over and throw me out for trying to interface too many networks to colaborate around knowledge rather than amke it an info-tech's separation haven


>
> At the end of the day, brand, knowledge all human and interdisciplinary flows that sustain a system's deepest purpose are wholly misvalued by current accounting and all metrics currently in monopoly use by management. For example even though goodwill is the majority part of the market value of any company in the service economy, accountants separate all the parts of this into boxes they can measure rather than mapping it as a flow that multiplies more value than parts. unless we change the mathematical way in which the world's largest organisations are valued and measured then noting will, get better worldwide and we will lose sustainability of future generations - whether the first terminal crisis is climate, war, plague, or poverty's terrifying inhumanities to one another I don't know (and anyhow in an increasingly networked world they all are flows to)
>

> If you'd like to nominate 5 people whose trust the future of Russia or Eastern Europe most depends on for all people's sustainability, I will try to include them in the open source guidebook and maps that will be made out ofhttp://up200.tvfor my father's 85th birthday present next year http://www.normanmacrae.com/friends.html
>
> In a sense every true knowledge person needs to ask how do they collaborate openly with other types of knowledge persons. I am currently mapping the 200 people worth the world trusting most as collaboration and entrepreneurs and change guides in 2008 athttp://up200.tv- nominations welcome
>
> vote with 1000 people on what sort of brand truth you wanthttp://www.fastcompany.com/poll/?x=573

> Chris, I thought that you read A7 athttp://www.medinge.org/about.shtml


> and as I can understand it was written with respect.
>
> Yes, I can understand this example from
>
> http://www.grameenfoundation.org/what_we_do/microfinance_in_action/
>
> "... a woman may borrow $50 to buy chickens so she can sell eggs. As
> the chickens multiply, she will have more eggs to sell. Soon she can
> sell the chicks. Each expansion pulls her further from the devastation
> of poverty".
>
> It's helpful, no doubt. But let me to ask where is a limit or, in
> other words, might these women (their network of 'green' eggs
> producers) be more competitive over time than the industrial egg
> producers with unhealthy food for their chickens?
>
> Nikolay
>
> On Feb 7, 12:25 am, christopher macrae
> wrote:
>
> > In previous mail Nikolai asked:
>

> > 1 why doeswww.medinge.orguse my name? I am not aware that they do any longer. Please inform if opposite is case.


>
> > 2 who is GWB - sorry I don't thing Pres Bush was worth more than an acronym - I am not being political in the sense of democratic versus republican, I jst think the guy has lost touch with the world in the same way that Kaiser Wilhelm had about 100 years ago
>
> 10 Years Ago:
>
>
>
> UKRAINE
> From Valentin Pertsiya

> 1) In April some issues of the newspaper I assume to tell about a retails brand (private labels). Could not you recommend to me the books (issues), in which the basic information about retails brand is explained? It would be magnificent, if you also could give me the references on Internet sites, because in our country it is impossible to get the foreign books and heavily to search foreign magazines. 2) My second question concerns the strategy of brand extensions. Some years ago a new firm was started in our country. Idea of its owner - construction of the original franchise. (Today many factories in our country do not work because of various problems). He comes on a factory and speaks: you emit for me the goods (milk - for example), agrees of my design and under my name. After issue of the goods I pay to you minimum money, I take away the goods and I sell it yourself. Now on shelfs of shops there were grocery goods under the name äÏ×ÇÁÎØ (Dovgan - surname the person
> who is has invented idea). All goods are emited under one name. Juice äÏ×ÇÁÎØ, mayonnaise äÏ×ÇÁÎØ, vodka äÏ×ÇÁÎØ, beer and water äÏ×ÇÁÎØ etc. It is clear, that, according to bases of the theory branding, if emit all goods under one name it both facilitates a conclusion new brands and increases probability of origin of problems. Unfortunately, I have not sufficient knowledge in branding area, what to analyse all pluses and minuses of such approach, on a comparison with the approach for example P and G. That is why I ask you and your colleagues on e-mail to help me to analyse marketing policy of äÏ×ÇÁÎØ.


> From Chris Macrae To Valentin, you are raising some enormous

> ...
>
> read more »

Raj Aphale

unread,
Feb 8, 2007, 6:51:52 AM2/8/07
to Knowledg...@googlegroups.com
Are we talking about a specific project? Sorry for asking a basic question.
I missed a few mails in between.

Regards,

Raj

Consider:

http://sgibnev.ru/?/Edelstar/dovgan/

Nikolay

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.24/668 - Release Date: 2/4/2007
1:30 AM





___________________________________________________________
All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 8, 2007, 2:39:33 PM2/8/07
to KnowledgePersons
Raj,

I think we are exploring the opportunities. You can use this link:

http://groups.google.com/group/KnowledgePersons/browse_thread/thread/4c9b75937c6b843e

to browse the thread.

Nikolay

> be represented as a description - who, what, where ... - seehttp://knowledgeperson.com(it's my task). And the collaborative self-
> consulting frameworkhttp://knowledgeperson.com/how.htmlcan be

> > achieve without blowing herself up.http://futurehistory.jpYou place your


> > bets and takes your choice. Either the next 5 years is the most vital ever
> > for collaborating in sustainability or you can fiffle while every Rome
> > burns. That's how we see The Age of Fallibility and every plummeting
> > trust- anyway at Passports to Sustainability

> >http://passports.jpandhttp://thecooperation.tvandabout 30 peoples


> > affiliates I know how to network around from various grasssroots
> > emergencies up
>
> > Both brand marketers and knowledge management have great powers in these
> > flows ; and clearly the history of communications power from Stalin/Hitler
> > down shows it can be organised to goodwill or badwill ends ; in between
> > there is system blindness about flows; and long-term if any human
> > relations system (including our maps of networked connecting world) is not
> > relen tlessly measurable to its deepest/contextual purpose every cycle, a
> > blind system compounds the same loss of true purpose and trust-flow as one
> > where power is intentionally being manipulated against most of the people
> > connected by the system (or networks as system*system*system)
>
> > I started several networks from 1990 on about a second interconnecting
> > type of branding or vision or systemic valuation of deepest sustainable
> > purpose. These are for people who do not see branding primarily as making
> > their separate business case for spending more and more on advertising or
> > other departments executions. World Class Brand Network (including an
> > email I still use wcbn...@easynet.co.uk) was named after my first 1990
> > book; Chief Brand Officers Association was named after those boardroom
> > members who saw brand or marketing as integral to how leadership changes
> > the future for the better. It is true that primarily people in my networks
> > hosted the first 2 annual meetings in Medinge 2001/2. These were just
> > retreats where everyone paid their own way to try and find likeminded
> > networkers. The beginning and end of this venture was the

> > bookwww.beyond-branding.comWeused to have a slogan : we loved brands (how


> > markets remain the only way that truth entreprenurs can
> > serve people's deepest needs) but we also agreed with Naomi Klein of
> > NoLogo that most of the world's biggest brands were systemising loss of
> > trust, compounding loss of sustainability. We wanted to change that by
> > example. Then some more commercial people took over the majority will of
> > Medinge. They did not even inform me what they were doing and as you can
> > see I was never invited to be on the front page of the new medinge.org nor
> > is the centre of gravity of that crowd much ado with what I most want to
> > explore, connect....but then not many people understand compound economics

> > from first pattern ruling principleshttp://worldeconomist.netthereis an


> > awful miseductaion problem as successive 20th C governments of left and
> > righ and centre have used each new medium as a stealth tax against
> > humanity's deepest social and sustainable needs. Show me where a great
> > (freedom, happiness empowering) public servant exists any longer... show
> > me where globalisations professions still keep
> > hippocratic oaths
>
> > Though I am no saint, as a matematician I have endlessly come across
> > this sort of battle for greater common good nearly 20 years -working to
> > try to reverse the image-ridden flow in such dreadful places as a Big 5
> > accountant and a BIg 1 ad adency- and for maore than a decade with almost
> > anything I co-host on web or as a real meetings network. For example I was
> > paid for eighteen months by the world's largest communications agency to

> > hostwww.brandknowledge.combutthen dotcoms imploded and the idea that

> ...
>
> read more >

christopher macrae

unread,
Feb 8, 2007, 4:23:56 PM2/8/07
to Knowledg...@googlegroups.com
in networks that are virtually interfaced, I have seen people thrown out all the time; not all have merited it
 
in networks that have real components, by thrown out I mean shunted from being the person who has invested the most time, most personally interconnected and original truth gravity to the network
 
to someone coming along and saying we can make money faster by doing something else, then rubbishing the original founder behind his back until it is harder work for the original person to influence what the network becomes than to start elsewhere; of course the original person still takes some of the very deepest people with him,
 
but additionally with a web like medinge.org. a  complicated  extra issue is`that annually the main actual real meeting is a 3 day reterat in a lakelands palace; so all you have to do as a spoiler of the original net is successfully lobby the owner of the palace to change the flow of what the whole network focuses on; if that owner also needs money to keep the palace going then the deeper chnage efforts that require longer investments before they pay back in money or in helping save the world
 
you dont need to take every word literally above to see that networks need extraoridnarily hi-trust protiocols if they are not to turn against the deepeest interests they could have flowed; but then I would say that because that is the simplest maths audit that I wish to open source as a transparenct mapmaking person
 
chris macrae http://oxbridge.tv/ 

>
> I think it's impossible to throw out a fellow Knowledge Person
> networker from the 'Knowledge Person' brand project because of the
> open nature of such a network.

Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 12, 2007, 1:42:31 AM2/12/07
to KnowledgePersons
Chris, I really can't imagine how to be thrown out from the open
network, if anyone can join this network and suggest something (that's
why it's open).

If we're talking here about Medinge, do consider that I can't join
Medinge as a member (if I want it), but Medinge people can join
Knowledge Persons.

Regarding group real meetings: I did not think about the risks you
say, Chris, because did not have an excuse. I agree a protocol or
agreement is needed, but between what sides/participants?

Nikolay

On Feb 9, 12:23 am, christopher macrae <chris.mac...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:


> in networks that are virtually interfaced, I have seen people thrown out all the time; not all have merited it
>
> in networks that have real components, by thrown out I mean shunted from being the person who has invested the most time, most personally interconnected and original truth gravity to the network
>
> to someone coming along and saying we can make money faster by doing something else, then rubbishing the original founder behind his back until it is harder work for the original person to influence what the network becomes than to start elsewhere; of course the original person still takes some of the very deepest people with him,
>
> but additionally with a web like medinge.org. a complicated extra issue is`that annually the main actual real meeting is a 3 day reterat in a lakelands palace; so all you have to do as a spoiler of the original net is successfully lobby the owner of the palace to change the flow of what the whole network focuses on; if that owner also needs money to keep the palace going then the deeper chnage efforts that require longer investments before they pay back in money or in helping save the world
>
> you dont need to take every word literally above to see that networks need extraoridnarily hi-trust protiocols if they are not to turn against the deepeest interests they could have flowed; but then I would say that because that is the simplest maths audit that I wish to open source as a transparenct mapmaking person
>

> chris macraehttp://oxbridge.tv/


> www.valuetrue.com
>
>
>
> > I think it's impossible to throw out a fellow Knowledge Person
> > networker from the 'Knowledge Person' brand project because of the
> > open nature of such a network.
>

> ---------------------------------

christopher macrae

unread,
Feb 12, 2007, 12:10:03 PM2/12/07
to Knowledg...@googlegroups.com
well for example, when for 2 years I have been the only person keeping the blog of the network's book alive - so much so that a co-networker originally asked whether to close it completely- and then later when it has earned quite a large interactive audinece,  some group of 4 people come along and say my content does not connect with theirs and turn off the settings so that I can contribute to the blog, I feel thrown out
 
by which I mean I realise there is no point wasting my time or investing in the network; worse I see that the previous network which I completely founded has no lost all its people into this network with a building where people like meeting so I have had both networks, and many months of time getting to know some key people closed around me
 
please do stop applying literal tests to everything I write because flow does not work just like that ; I agree I have not been deleted as a person but there are other ways a network can be taken over and have the impact of throwing a person out; unfortunatly these ways come to ahead wherever you try to emerge a very innovative network; there's always more to extract from the conventional viewpoint until you have broken through the innovation ; and there are always some pariahs who are too greedy to wait
 
chris


Nikolay Kryachkov <n...@au.ru> wrote:

Chris, I really can't imagine how to be thrown out from the open
network, if anyone can join this network and suggest something (that's
why it's open).

If we're talking here about Medinge, do consider that I can't join
Medinge as a member (if I want it), but Medinge people can join
Knowledge Persons.

Regarding group real meetings: I did not think about the risks you
say, Chris, because did not have an excuse. I agree a protocol or
agreement is needed, but between what sides/participants?

Nikolay

On Feb 9, 12:23 am, christopher macrae
wrote:
> in networks that are virtually interfaced, I have seen people thrown out all the time; not all have merited it
>
> in networks that have real components, by thrown out I mean shunted from being the person who has invested the most time, most personally interconnected and original truth gravity to the network
>
> to someone coming along and saying we can make money faster by doing something else, then rubbishing the original founder behind his back until it is harder work for the original person to influence what the network becomes than to start elsewhere; of course the original person still takes some of the very deepest people with him,
>
> but additionally with a web like medinge.org. a complicated extra issue is`that annually the main actual real meeting is a 3 day reterat in a lakelands palace; so all you have to do as a spoiler of the original net is successfully lobby the owner of the palace to change the flow of what the whole network focuses on; if that owner also needs money to keep the palace going then the deeper chnage efforts that require longer investments before they pay back in money or in helping save the world
>
> you dont need to take every word literally above to see that networks need extraoridnarily hi-trust protiocols if they are not to turn against the deepeest interests they could have flowed; but then I would say that because that is the simplest maths audit that I wish to open source as a transparenct mapmaking person
>
> chris macraehttp://oxbridge.tv/
> www.valuetrue.com
>
>
>
> > I think it's impossible to throw out a fellow Knowledge Person
> > networker from the 'Knowledge Person' brand project because of the
> > open nature of such a network.
>
> ---------------------------------
> New Yahoo! Mail is the ultimate force in competitive emailing. Find out more at the Yahoo! Mail Championships. Plus: play games and win prizes.


Raj Aphale

unread,
Feb 12, 2007, 9:37:13 PM2/12/07
to Knowledg...@googlegroups.com
Do we really need to throw someone out?
 
Regards,
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 10:40 PM
Subject: [Knowledge Persons] Re: Knowledge Persons] what I have to share as a knowledge and media person

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.

Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.36/681 - Release Date: 2/11/2007 6:50 PM

Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 13, 2007, 4:37:37 AM2/13/07
to KnowledgePersons
No Raj.

These risks must be considered when a project is outlined. But it's
not yet a fact.

Chris, we are talking and I don't test you. I started from "back to
individualism" as you remember due to my personal negative experience.

All I want is to understand - is it possible to get a positive and
practical interest for what is said here or it is just a show for the
observers (they are really here)?

Nikolay

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------


> What kind of emailer are you? Find out today - get a free analysis of your email personality. Take the quiz at the Yahoo! Mail Championship
>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Raj Aphale

unread,
Feb 13, 2007, 9:05:35 AM2/13/07
to Knowledg...@googlegroups.com
We will possibly have situations where -

1. individuals may want to stop contributing

2. the group / leader may find someone's contribution is great in some areas
but not so good in some other areas. We all have our own strengths and
weaknesses.

3. differences of opinion as to how to progress on the project, where the
group as a whole or the moderator / leader needs to take a call. In that
case we take the risk of people of differing opinion stop contributing
though they may be capable of.

Regards,


----- Original Message -----
From: "Nikolay Kryachkov" <n...@au.ru>
To: "KnowledgePersons" <Knowledg...@googlegroups.com>

> --

> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.

> Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.37/682 - Release Date: 2/12/2007
> 1:23 PM
>
>



___________________________________________________________
All New Yahoo! Mail – Tired of Vi@gr@! come-ons? Let our SpamGuard protect you. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

christopher macrae

unread,
Feb 13, 2007, 10:55:03 AM2/13/07
to Knowledg...@googlegroups.com
Nikolay, I thought all the time we were talking about medinge as  case study - which incidenatlly I had invested say 20 days of my time in as well many of my most valued connections
 
I am sorry if I have confused anyone at knowledge persons or if I have prolonged more conversation on this topic that the community is interested in; whilst I think there are very important issues about network rules , if these conversations apeople would rather not have in this group or individually then I am at chris....@yahoo.co.uk
 
I will close my contribution on this matter (unless encouraged otherwise) to point out that:
 
the big problems of protocol seem to arise with hybrid networks where some people are directly making money (or getting a job) out of the way the network is governed (and the content that is stremaed) and some are  using that network space on deeply humanitarian or pure open source elarning issues - a classic crisis of this sort is www.ecademy.com  - whilst its a huge example; in smaller ways (ultimately impacting li velihoods of individuals) the same crisis of transparency protocols can happen with any size of hybrid network
 
at least in an intangibles and network connecting world, most of the value is in empowering the trust-flow, whereas accountants and western business strategists have only ever had reward models for people who box things up
chris
Raj Aphale <raja...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider.

Raj Aphale

unread,
Feb 13, 2007, 11:06:23 AM2/13/07
to Knowledg...@googlegroups.com
I think you should continue contributing Christopher.
 
Regards,

Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 13, 2007, 12:34:05 PM2/13/07
to KnowledgePersons
Chris, don't be sorry. And Knowledge Persons is not a community. This
group is being formed mostly from random contacts - in fact from my
invitations of people I never met, except one person. But it doesn't
matter - we can talk via email.

Raj, I think the differences in opinions can be and I suggest not to
limit people in that. Everyone is free to form a project he/she wants
because Knowledge Persons are individuals in collaboration and only
they own their parts to contribute to the project they want. But I
personally will never join the project that contradicts my
understanding of what must be. Knowledge Person is a concept, not an
organisation with the pre-paid top positions and others - 2nd class
for contribution, with the committee to accept or reject suggestion
and other "things" that is being used in so-called open source
networks. A competitive space for evolution, perhaps, where people can
see who is who and what are the doings.

I can understand a business model of ecademy as a space to charge for
connections. If so, its meaning is an analogue of market square with
paid entrance. So, it is not open.

Transparency is a popular word. It's like shop-window - you see but
can't re-arrange what is shown. Openness gives such an opportunity and
there is no need to fear disorder - people are clever and understand
that they have names and their doings are visible (a respectful name
of organisation will not protect them). To a certain extent openness
is better protected than closed or transparent organisations.

But maybe you see some defects in this reasoning.

Nikolay

On Feb 13, 7:06 pm, "Raj Aphale" <rajaph...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> I think you should continue contributing Christopher.
>
> Regards,
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: christopher macrae
> To: Knowledg...@googlegroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 9:25 PM
> Subject: [Knowledge Persons] Re: Knowledge Persons] what I have to share as a knowledge and media person
>
> Nikolay, I thought all the time we were talking about medinge as case study - which incidenatlly I had invested say 20 days of my time in as well many of my most valued connections
>

> I am sorry if I have confused anyone at knowledge persons or if I have prolonged more conversation on this topic that the community is interested in; whilst I think there are very important issues about network rules , if these conversations apeople would rather not have in this group or individually then I am at chris.mac...@yahoo.co.uk


>
> I will close my contribution on this matter (unless encouraged otherwise) to point out that:
>

> the big problems of protocol seem to arise with hybrid networks where some people are directly making money (or getting a job) out of the way the network is governed (and the content that is stremaed) and some are using that network space on deeply humanitarian or pure open source elarning issues - a classic crisis of this sort iswww.ecademy.com - whilst its a huge example; in smaller ways (ultimately impacting li velihoods of individuals) the same crisis of transparency protocols can happen with any size of hybrid network


>
> at least in an intangibles and network connecting world, most of the value is in empowering the trust-flow, whereas accountants and western business strategists have only ever had reward models for people who box things up
>
> chris

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------


> What kind of emailer are you? Find out today - get a free analysis of your email personality. Take the quiz at the Yahoo! Mail Championship
>

> ------------------------------------------------------------------------


>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.36/681 - Release Date: 2/11/2007 6:50 PM
>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------


> The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider
>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 13, 2007, 1:06:03 PM2/13/07
to KnowledgePersons
Chris and all, I meant do continue contributing here at this email
group.

Nikolay

> > the big problems of protocol seem to arise with hybrid networks where some people are directly making money (or getting a job) out of the way the network is governed (and the content that is stremaed) and some are using that network space on deeply humanitarian or pure open source elarning issues - a classic crisis of this sort iswww.ecademy.com- whilst its a huge example; in smaller ways (ultimately impacting li velihoods of individuals) the same crisis of transparency protocols can happen with any size of hybrid network

christopher macrae

unread,
Feb 13, 2007, 5:51:28 PM2/13/07
to Knowledg...@googlegroups.com, bba...@infoplex-uk.com
• Tim Berners-Lee: The vision I have for the 'Web is about anything being potentially connected with anything. It is a vision that provides us with new freedom, and allows us to grow faster than we ever could when we were fettered by the hierarchical classification systems into which we bound our-selves. It leaves the entirety of our previous ways of working as just one tool among many. It leaves our previous fears for the future as one set among many. And it brings the workings of society closer to the workings of our minds.”
 
 
This group has mentioned transparency many times in posts over the last fortnight:  including in announcing forthcoming Tapscott Clusters event;
 
transparency is one of 3 interlocking valuation constructs that transparency community and I at www.valuetrue.com  provide auditing methods for -we do this in as open source way as we can whilst insisting that our methodology is done mathematically the way we expect ; a flow that becomes everything or nothing if you play out Berners Lee
 
around 2001 , Don was coordinating very interesting corporate syndicates around transparency; he gave a superb debrief of early work at ecademy.com; if my memory is correct, I had been told at one stage that the conference board was going to bring out a wholly higher system level way of valuing transparency
 
 the other two dynamics alongside transparency being trust-flow; and modelling sustainability in terms of what compound future is exponentially bubbling up or down around any market or human relations network that is part of a market
 
One of the ways I define transparency, and this can be done at any level from a whole community/network to individual projects is:
 
A) can we see a map of all the different interests
 
*B) and audit that map in a way that makes it clear there are no conflicts (no win-loses) between any of the core interests
 
This is an "empowerment or systemic entrepreneurial" model that builds from detailed contexts up, as well as being holonic in such flow senses as a project (or an intraprenurial service franchise)
 can be part of a network or organisation may be part of a global sector or nation al economy etc. For all interfacing systems to be transparent you need to be able to map through interfaces at more macro or micro levels.
 
 One of my defects is that I am just a mathematician, not great with verbal specification.
What I am talking about is as simple a model of true interfacing systems as can be defined - and maps are the simplest artefacts within such an audit.  At the same time the flows involved in such an audit are in specific mathematical ways the exact opposite of where eg tangible accounting systems box in or ring fence what they analyse as well as making artificial  separations of past from future. If you think of goodwill, trust, purpose, transparency - these are all human relations investments which are largely already spinning from the integrity of what has been networked or traded in the past
 
Since this group is branded with the knowledge word, it may relevant to say that when I was in charge of the special interest group of intellectual and other capitals in the knowledge angels network stage of evolution of EU knowledgeboard.com , I looked at dozens of intellectual and other capital models, and none are compatible with the whole system methods that we require to understand transparency, intangibles or goodwill flows; at the end of the day all these models reduced their bottom lines to something that retrofitted tangible auditing instead of providing information wholly different from it
 
a classical case from global business history involves the andersen audit company itself; according to valuetrue maths reputation and transparency flows are ultimately multiplicative ; to give a very simple example : if in the view of business stakeholders you are valued as worth billions of dollars but in the view of society you have serially busted true and fair ie are worth nothing - what is you future worth - our model says billions *0= 0  ;tangible accounting maths says billions+0=billions; leaders make very different ethical and risk decisions depending which of these 2 projections they beleive compounds future worth
 
+ people live in a  world whose assumptions are boxed in and ultimately not transparent
 
* people live in a world of system and network flows and transparency 
 
a true map is a really beautiful construct to mathematicians in search of truth because it lives (it actions learnings) in its flows and connections; the fact that most large western organisations do not wholly and systematically live in and around flow shows that their brand, their knowledge and all their human relations architecture is not integral or sustainable in the same way that any dynamic that can be mapped is; for those who want to choose a transfomation (integrate localities into global) context such as climate, you will of course have absolute zero chance of global organisations compounding sustainability of climate flows unless you can require them to map transparently; biomass experts say the same thing though in different lingo
 
ps one of the most ironical events in business history is the collapse of dotcoms; using transparency maps there would never have been any need for all those business models to be valued so highly while they were all selling to and fast burning each other; a different species of dotcoms would have evolved if a different auditing maths than that which compounds unseen wealth had been used; interesting when in 2000 Brookings and Georgetown debriefed an incoming Texas administration of the extreme risks of every sort of systemising globalisation around compound unseen wealth, the Texans said get lost; 2 quarters later 9/11 happened; soon enron and andersen as well as hundreds of dotcoms went bust; nothing has yet changed in the maths that the world's biggest organisations are ultimately governed by; until or unless it is, what George Soros calls the age of fallibility will continue to compound risks which get ever closer to global irreversibility 
 


Nikolay Kryachkov

unread,
Feb 14, 2007, 1:04:06 PM2/14/07
to KnowledgePersons
I thought about multiplicative nature of networks, but from a text
virus (correct understanding) outlook.

Suppose understanding is measurable.

For examle, a connection A-B has a value of 100% (or = 1)
understanding (in fact it's content valuation).

A connection B-C has 0.25 value.

Total network A-B-C value = 1 * 0.25 = 0.25

If it is correct, it means that content quality form not only the
appropriate connections (the network architecture), but also gives an
opportunity to measure a value of networks and maybe their future.

But to go this direction content and connections must be open to audit
and correct.

By the way, http://knowledgeperson.com/how.html is about connection of
such possible valuation with cash flow ...

Nikolay

On Feb 14, 1:51 am, christopher macrae <chris.mac...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:


> http://www.valuetrue.com/home/glossary.cfm?letter=T
> · Tim Berners-Lee: The vision I have for the 'Web is about anything being potentially connected with anything. It is a vision that provides us with new freedom, and allows us to grow faster than we ever could when we were fettered by the hierarchical classification systems into which we bound our-selves. It leaves the entirety of our previous ways of working as just one tool among many. It leaves our previous fears for the future as one set among many. And it brings the workings of society closer to the workings of our minds."
>
> This group has mentioned transparency many times in posts over the last fortnight: including in announcing forthcoming Tapscott Clusters event;
>

> transparency is one of 3 interlocking valuation constructs that transparency community and I atwww.valuetrue.com provide auditing methods for -we do this in as open source way as we can whilst insisting that our methodology is done mathematically the way we expect ; a flow that becomes everything or nothing if you play out Berners Lee


>
> around 2001 , Don was coordinating very interesting corporate syndicates around transparency; he gave a superb debrief of early work at ecademy.com; if my memory is correct, I had been told at one stage that the conference board was going to bring out a wholly higher system level way of valuing transparency
>
> the other two dynamics alongside transparency being trust-flow; and modelling sustainability in terms of what compound future is exponentially bubbling up or down around any market or human relations network that is part of a market
>
> One of the ways I define transparency, and this can be done at any level from a whole community/network to individual projects is:
>
> A) can we see a map of all the different interests
>
> *B) and audit that map in a way that makes it clear there are no conflicts (no win-loses) between any of the core interests
>
> This is an "empowerment or systemic entrepreneurial" model that builds from detailed contexts up, as well as being holonic in such flow senses as a project (or an intraprenurial service franchise)
> http://www.normanmacrae.com/intrapreneur.html
> can be part of a network or organisation may be part of a global sector or nation al economy etc. For all interfacing systems to be transparent you need to be able to map through interfaces at more macro or micro levels.
>
> One of my defects is that I am just a mathematician, not great with verbal specification.
>
> What I am talking about is as simple a model of true interfacing systems as can be defined - and maps are the simplest artefacts within such an audit. At the same time the flows involved in such an audit are in specific mathematical ways the exact opposite of where eg tangible accounting systems box in or ring fence what they analyse as well as making artificial separations of past from future. If you think of goodwill, trust, purpose, transparency - these are all human relations investments which are largely already spinning from the integrity of what has been networked or traded in the past
>
> Since this group is branded with the knowledge word, it may relevant to say that when I was in charge of the special interest group of intellectual and other capitals in the knowledge angels network stage of evolution of EU knowledgeboard.com , I looked at dozens of intellectual and other capital models, and none are compatible with the whole system methods that we require to understand transparency, intangibles or goodwill flows; at the end of the day all these models reduced their bottom lines to something that retrofitted tangible auditing instead of providing information wholly different from it
>
> a classical case from global business history involves the andersen audit company itself; according to valuetrue maths reputation and transparency flows are ultimately multiplicative ; to give a very simple example : if in the view of business stakeholders you are valued as worth billions of dollars but in the view of society you have serially busted true and fair ie are worth nothing - what is you future worth - our model says billions *0= 0 ;tangible accounting maths says billions+0=billions; leaders make very different ethical and risk decisions depending which of these 2 projections they beleive compounds future worth
>
> + people live in a world whose assumptions are boxed in and ultimately not transparent
>
> * people live in a world of system and network flows and transparency
>
> a true map is a really beautiful construct to mathematicians in search of truth because it lives (it actions learnings) in its flows and connections; the fact that most large western organisations do not wholly and systematically live in and around flow shows that their brand, their knowledge and all their human relations architecture is not integral or sustainable in the same way that any dynamic that can be mapped is; for those who want to choose a transfomation (integrate localities into global) context such as climate, you will of course have absolute zero chance of global organisations compounding sustainability of climate flows unless you can require them to map transparently; biomass experts say the same thing though in different lingo
>

> chris macraehttp://worldeconomist.nethttp://futurehistory.jphttp://worldentrepreneur.net


> ps one of the most ironical events in business history is the collapse of dotcoms; using transparency maps there would never have been any need for all those business models to be valued so highly while they were all selling to and fast burning each other; a different species of dotcoms would have evolved if a different auditing maths than that which compounds unseen wealth had been used; interesting when in 2000 Brookings and Georgetown debriefed an incoming Texas administration of the extreme risks of every sort of systemising globalisation around compound unseen wealth, the Texans said get lost; 2 quarters later 9/11 happened; soon enron and andersen as well as hundreds of dotcoms went bust; nothing has yet changed in the maths that the world's biggest organisations are ultimately governed by; until or unless it is, what George Soros calls the age of fallibility will continue to compound risks which get ever closer to global irreversibility
>
> http://networkeconomics.tv/
>

> ---------------------------------

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages