Transparency - Revision history

TiberiusB at 19:27, 19 April 2026

2026-04-19T19:27:10Z

TiberiusB: /* Vertical vs horizontal transparency */

2026-03-17T22:18:50Z

Vertical vs horizontal transparency

TiberiusB: /* Vertical vs horizontal */

2026-03-17T22:18:17Z

Vertical vs horizontal

TiberiusB at 22:17, 17 March 2026

2026-03-17T22:17:37Z

TiberiusB at 08:45, 17 March 2026

2026-03-17T08:45:05Z

TiberiusB: /* Link to the p2p economics */

2024-11-09T06:32:28Z

Link to the p2p economics

TiberiusB at 04:13, 9 November 2024

2024-11-09T04:13:38Z

TiberiusB at 17:15, 20 June 2024

2024-06-20T17:15:49Z

TiberiusB at 19:24, 15 February 2024

2024-02-15T19:24:28Z

TiberiusB at 16:46, 9 February 2024

2024-02-09T16:46:05Z

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
-: '''''Vertical transparency''' functions as the structural safeguard against the “iron law of oligarchy,” ensuring that those in positions of elevated influence remain accountable to the community at large. By mandating the public disclosure of governance deliberations and strategic roadmaps, it transforms leadership from a “black box” of hidden agendas into a glass-box of shared intent. This visibility prevents the capture of a project by powerful interest groups, as maintainers must justify strategic pivots against the community’s collective mission rather than private incentives (Grosman & Leiponen, 2018). Vertical transparency alarms the openness of leadership or core maintainers toward the broader contributor base, facilitated through the public disclosure of governance decisions, resource allocations, and strategic roadmaps (Grosman & Leiponen, 2018). By ensuring that powerholders’ actions are subject to collective scrutiny, vertical transparency mitigates suspicion of hidden authority''.
+: '''''Vertical transparency''' functions as the structural safeguard against the “iron law of oligarchy,” ensuring that those in positions of elevated influence remain accountable to the community at large. By mandating the public disclosure of governance deliberations and strategic roadmaps, it transforms leadership from a “black box” of hidden agendas into a glass-box of shared intent. This visibility prevents the capture of a project by powerful interest groups, as maintainers must justify strategic pivots against the community’s collective mission rather than private incentives (Grosman & Leiponen, 2018). Vertical transparency alarms the openness of leadership or core maintainers toward the broader contributor base, facilitated through the public disclosure of governance decisions, [[resource]] [[allocation]]s, and strategic roadmaps (Grosman & Leiponen, 2018). By ensuring that powerholders’ actions are subject to collective scrutiny, vertical transparency mitigates suspicion of hidden authority''.
 : '''''Horizontal transparency''' refers to the visibility of peer contributions, processes, and interactions, enabling community members to monitor one another and sustain accountability without central oversight. It curbs opportunism among peers by reducing information asymmetries laterally. This is the essence of open superposition (Howison & Crowston, 2014), where overlapping and observable inputs create a shared field of trust. Horizontal transparency shifts oversight from hierarchical managers to the collective gaze of peers, transforming visibility into a distributed mechanism of accountability that both enables collaboration and deters opportunism (Konrad, 2025). O’Mahony and Ferraro (2007) document how open-source projects publish code, discussions, and governance deliberations publicly, embedding accountability and enabling shared decision-making. Making roadmaps, contributions, budget decisions, and design rationale visible reduces information asymmetry—the very condition that fuels opportunism in TCT—while replacing hidden control with reputational and collective oversight. As scholars note, sunlight functions as a deterrent: when actions are observable, concealment of shirking and self-serving maneuvers become challenging (Ferrin, Dirks, & Shah, 2006). Horizontal visibility enables peers to learn, correct, and improve one another’s work, enhancing quality and normalizing mutual self-scrutiny. This skill development drives the market not only to employ from open-source communities but also to build on open-source software—a common practice nowadays (Conti et al., 2025, von Krogh & von Hippel, 2006)''.
 : ''Collectively, these two dimensions illustrate how CBPP communities blend distributed peer oversight with openness from leadership, creating a multi-layered architecture of accountability. In this sense, transparency is simultaneously an ethical and governance mechanism. It enables participants to evaluate whether behavior aligns with shared values, while also providing an organizational tool for monitoring and coordination (Mirghaderi et al., 2023)''.
@@ Line 43: / Line 43: @@
 Transparency, like [[openness]], is an important feature of open networks and communities ([[OVNs]] alike). According to [[Yochai Benkler]], open networks have two main advantages over traditional firms:
 # lower opportunity costs
-# better allocation of [[resources]]
+# better [[allocation]] of [[resources]]
 Lower opportunity costs means that open networks are very efficient at exploring the field of opportunities and converging on good ones. That is because they push sensing and sensemaking to the edge of the network, allowing even distant [[participants]] to input new ideas into a [[process]]. In order for that to function, open networks provide unhindered access to information (what's going on, what's the objective, etc.), which allows even someone who just passes-by to propose something.
-When it comes to allocation of [[resources]], including matching talent to [[processes]] (human resource allocation) open networks rely on self-allocation. For example, someone who just discovers an open source project on a Wiki (content management tool, documentation) can jump to the workflow (task management tool) and see that the group struggles with an electronic problem. If this individual possesses the required skills and has some free time can decide to search the solution and post it to the group. Perhaps a specific instrument is also needed to make some measurements, the individual may be able to provide it or make the measurement him/her self. Or perhaps the group needs some funding to continue the development of the project, this individual can contribute to a [[crowdfunding]] campaign that has been set up for the project. Self-allocation stands in contrast with centrally planned allocation, where a managers need to decide on which projects to spend a budget and which employee to put on every project or who to hire to cover the required skills base and the workload. In order to allow self-allocation anyone on the edge of the network must have access to up-to-date information about the project.
+When it comes to [[allocation]] of [[resources]], including matching talent to [[processes]] (human resource [[allocation]]) open networks rely on self-allocation. For example, someone who just discovers an open source project on a Wiki (content management tool, documentation) can jump to the workflow (task management tool) and see that the group struggles with an electronic problem. If this individual possesses the required skills and has some free time can decide to search the solution and post it to the group. Perhaps a specific instrument is also needed to make some measurements, the individual may be able to provide it or make the measurement him/her self. Or perhaps the group needs some funding to continue the development of the project, this individual can contribute to a [[crowdfunding]] campaign that has been set up for the project. Self-allocation stands in contrast with centrally planned [[allocation]], where a managers need to decide on which projects to spend a budget and which employee to put on every project or who to hire to cover the required skills base and the workload. In order to allow self-allocation anyone on the edge of the network must have access to up-to-date information about the project.
-Thus, transparency, like [[openness]], is not an ideological requirement, it has an economic rationale within the p2p paradigm. Without transparency open networks (or [[OVNs]]) cannot leverage [[crowdsourcing]] of talent and [[resources]], therefore they cannot benefit from lower opportunity costs and better allocation of [[resources]], loose their advantage over traditional firms and slip back into traditional organizational structures to stay alive. Unlike traditional firms, which see transparency and [[openness]] as vulnerabilities, open networks have mechanisms in place to leverage transparency and [[openness]] to their advantage. We can also say that, transparency and [[openness]] are not just advantageous, but '''vital''' to open networks.
+Thus, transparency, like [[openness]], is not an ideological requirement, it has an economic rationale within the p2p paradigm. Without transparency open networks (or [[OVNs]]) cannot leverage [[crowdsourcing]] of talent and [[resources]], therefore they cannot benefit from lower opportunity costs and better [[allocation]] of [[resources]], loose their advantage over traditional firms and slip back into traditional organizational structures to stay alive. Unlike traditional firms, which see transparency and [[openness]] as vulnerabilities, open networks have mechanisms in place to leverage transparency and [[openness]] to their advantage. We can also say that, transparency and [[openness]] are not just advantageous, but '''vital''' to open networks.

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
-: ''Vertical and Horizontal Transparency. Vertical transparency functions as the structural safeguard against the “iron law of oligarchy,” ensuring that those in positions of elevated influence remain accountable to the community at large. By mandating the public disclosure of governance deliberations and strategic roadmaps, it transforms leadership from a “black box” of hidden agendas into a glass-box of shared intent. This visibility prevents the capture of a project by powerful interest groups, as maintainers must justify strategic pivots against the community’s collective mission rather than private incentives (Grosman & Leiponen, 2018). Vertical transparency alarms the openness of leadership or core maintainers toward the broader contributor base, facilitated through the public disclosure of governance decisions, resource allocations, and strategic roadmaps (Grosman & Leiponen, 2018). By ensuring that powerholders’ actions are subject to collective scrutiny, vertical transparency mitigates suspicion of hidden authority''.
+: '''''Vertical transparency''' functions as the structural safeguard against the “iron law of oligarchy,” ensuring that those in positions of elevated influence remain accountable to the community at large. By mandating the public disclosure of governance deliberations and strategic roadmaps, it transforms leadership from a “black box” of hidden agendas into a glass-box of shared intent. This visibility prevents the capture of a project by powerful interest groups, as maintainers must justify strategic pivots against the community’s collective mission rather than private incentives (Grosman & Leiponen, 2018). Vertical transparency alarms the openness of leadership or core maintainers toward the broader contributor base, facilitated through the public disclosure of governance decisions, resource allocations, and strategic roadmaps (Grosman & Leiponen, 2018). By ensuring that powerholders’ actions are subject to collective scrutiny, vertical transparency mitigates suspicion of hidden authority''.
-: ''Horizontal transparency refers to the visibility of peer contributions, processes, and interactions, enabling community members to monitor one another and sustain accountability without central oversight. It curbs opportunism among peers by reducing information asymmetries laterally. This is the essence of open superposition (Howison & Crowston, 2014), where overlapping and observable inputs create a shared field of trust. Horizontal transparency shifts oversight from hierarchical managers to the collective gaze of peers, transforming visibility into a distributed mechanism of accountability that both enables collaboration and deters opportunism (Konrad, 2025). O’Mahony and Ferraro (2007) document how open-source projects publish code, discussions, and governance deliberations publicly, embedding accountability and enabling shared decision-making. Making roadmaps, contributions, budget decisions, and design rationale visible reduces information asymmetry—the very condition that fuels opportunism in TCT—while replacing hidden control with reputational and collective oversight. As scholars note, sunlight functions as a deterrent: when actions are observable, concealment of shirking and self-serving maneuvers become challenging (Ferrin, Dirks, & Shah, 2006). Horizontal visibility enables peers to learn, correct, and improve one another’s work, enhancing quality and normalizing mutual self-scrutiny. This skill development drives the market not only to employ from open-source communities but also to build on open-source software—a common practice nowadays (Conti et al., 2025, von Krogh & von Hippel, 2006)''.
+: '''''Horizontal transparency''' refers to the visibility of peer contributions, processes, and interactions, enabling community members to monitor one another and sustain accountability without central oversight. It curbs opportunism among peers by reducing information asymmetries laterally. This is the essence of open superposition (Howison & Crowston, 2014), where overlapping and observable inputs create a shared field of trust. Horizontal transparency shifts oversight from hierarchical managers to the collective gaze of peers, transforming visibility into a distributed mechanism of accountability that both enables collaboration and deters opportunism (Konrad, 2025). O’Mahony and Ferraro (2007) document how open-source projects publish code, discussions, and governance deliberations publicly, embedding accountability and enabling shared decision-making. Making roadmaps, contributions, budget decisions, and design rationale visible reduces information asymmetry—the very condition that fuels opportunism in TCT—while replacing hidden control with reputational and collective oversight. As scholars note, sunlight functions as a deterrent: when actions are observable, concealment of shirking and self-serving maneuvers become challenging (Ferrin, Dirks, & Shah, 2006). Horizontal visibility enables peers to learn, correct, and improve one another’s work, enhancing quality and normalizing mutual self-scrutiny. This skill development drives the market not only to employ from open-source communities but also to build on open-source software—a common practice nowadays (Conti et al., 2025, von Krogh & von Hippel, 2006)''.
 : ''Collectively, these two dimensions illustrate how CBPP communities blend distributed peer oversight with openness from leadership, creating a multi-layered architecture of accountability. In this sense, transparency is simultaneously an ethical and governance mechanism. It enables participants to evaluate whether behavior aligns with shared values, while also providing an organizational tool for monitoring and coordination (Mirghaderi et al., 2023)''.

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 Transparency does not necessarily entails revealing the identity of [[participants]] (those who have created the data / information), although enough information about [[participation]] can allow triangulation and unmasking of anonymous [[participants]]. This is a problem with the [[Bitcoin]] network for example, which allows anonymous [[participation]] but [[participants]] can be unmasked by analyzing the ledger (history of transactions) and using information from centralized crypto markets and wallet providers, as well as from ISPs (Internet Service Providers).
-=Vertical vs horizontal =
+=Vertical vs horizontal transparency=
 See Reference: [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2444569X26000843 Mitigating opportunism in commons-based peer production: An integrated framework for ethical design architecture; Mayssam Daaboul and Antoine Harfouche]
-: Vertical and Horizontal Transparency. Vertical transparency functions as the structural safeguard against the “iron law of oligarchy,” ensuring that those in positions of elevated influence remain accountable to the community at large. By mandating the public disclosure of governance deliberations and strategic roadmaps, it transforms leadership from a “black box” of hidden agendas into a glass-box of shared intent. This visibility prevents the capture of a project by powerful interest groups, as maintainers must justify strategic pivots against the community’s collective mission rather than private incentives (Grosman & Leiponen, 2018). Vertical transparency alarms the openness of leadership or core maintainers toward the broader contributor base, facilitated through the public disclosure of governance decisions, resource allocations, and strategic roadmaps (Grosman & Leiponen, 2018). By ensuring that powerholders’ actions are subject to collective scrutiny, vertical transparency mitigates suspicion of hidden authority.
+: ''Vertical and Horizontal Transparency. Vertical transparency functions as the structural safeguard against the “iron law of oligarchy,” ensuring that those in positions of elevated influence remain accountable to the community at large. By mandating the public disclosure of governance deliberations and strategic roadmaps, it transforms leadership from a “black box” of hidden agendas into a glass-box of shared intent. This visibility prevents the capture of a project by powerful interest groups, as maintainers must justify strategic pivots against the community’s collective mission rather than private incentives (Grosman & Leiponen, 2018). Vertical transparency alarms the openness of leadership or core maintainers toward the broader contributor base, facilitated through the public disclosure of governance decisions, resource allocations, and strategic roadmaps (Grosman & Leiponen, 2018). By ensuring that powerholders’ actions are subject to collective scrutiny, vertical transparency mitigates suspicion of hidden authority''.
-: Horizontal transparency refers to the visibility of peer contributions, processes, and interactions, enabling community members to monitor one another and sustain accountability without central oversight. It curbs opportunism among peers by reducing information asymmetries laterally. This is the essence of open superposition (Howison & Crowston, 2014), where overlapping and observable inputs create a shared field of trust. Horizontal transparency shifts oversight from hierarchical managers to the collective gaze of peers, transforming visibility into a distributed mechanism of accountability that both enables collaboration and deters opportunism (Konrad, 2025). O’Mahony and Ferraro (2007) document how open-source projects publish code, discussions, and governance deliberations publicly, embedding accountability and enabling shared decision-making. Making roadmaps, contributions, budget decisions, and design rationale visible reduces information asymmetry—the very condition that fuels opportunism in TCT—while replacing hidden control with reputational and collective oversight. As scholars note, sunlight functions as a deterrent: when actions are observable, concealment of shirking and self-serving maneuvers become challenging (Ferrin, Dirks, & Shah, 2006). Horizontal visibility enables peers to learn, correct, and improve one another’s work, enhancing quality and normalizing mutual self-scrutiny. This skill development drives the market not only to employ from open-source communities but also to build on open-source software—a common practice nowadays (Conti et al., 2025, von Krogh & von Hippel, 2006).
+: ''Horizontal transparency refers to the visibility of peer contributions, processes, and interactions, enabling community members to monitor one another and sustain accountability without central oversight. It curbs opportunism among peers by reducing information asymmetries laterally. This is the essence of open superposition (Howison & Crowston, 2014), where overlapping and observable inputs create a shared field of trust. Horizontal transparency shifts oversight from hierarchical managers to the collective gaze of peers, transforming visibility into a distributed mechanism of accountability that both enables collaboration and deters opportunism (Konrad, 2025). O’Mahony and Ferraro (2007) document how open-source projects publish code, discussions, and governance deliberations publicly, embedding accountability and enabling shared decision-making. Making roadmaps, contributions, budget decisions, and design rationale visible reduces information asymmetry—the very condition that fuels opportunism in TCT—while replacing hidden control with reputational and collective oversight. As scholars note, sunlight functions as a deterrent: when actions are observable, concealment of shirking and self-serving maneuvers become challenging (Ferrin, Dirks, & Shah, 2006). Horizontal visibility enables peers to learn, correct, and improve one another’s work, enhancing quality and normalizing mutual self-scrutiny. This skill development drives the market not only to employ from open-source communities but also to build on open-source software—a common practice nowadays (Conti et al., 2025, von Krogh & von Hippel, 2006)''.
-: Collectively, these two dimensions illustrate how CBPP communities blend distributed peer oversight with openness from leadership, creating a multi-layered architecture of accountability. In this sense, transparency is simultaneously an ethical and governance mechanism. It enables participants to evaluate whether behavior aligns with shared values, while also providing an organizational tool for monitoring and coordination (Mirghaderi et al., 2023).
+: ''Collectively, these two dimensions illustrate how CBPP communities blend distributed peer oversight with openness from leadership, creating a multi-layered architecture of accountability. In this sense, transparency is simultaneously an ethical and governance mechanism. It enables participants to evaluate whether behavior aligns with shared values, while also providing an organizational tool for monitoring and coordination (Mirghaderi et al., 2023)''.
 =Transparency by default=

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 Transparency does not necessarily entails revealing the identity of [[participants]] (those who have created the data / information), although enough information about [[participation]] can allow triangulation and unmasking of anonymous [[participants]]. This is a problem with the [[Bitcoin]] network for example, which allows anonymous [[participation]] but [[participants]] can be unmasked by analyzing the ledger (history of transactions) and using information from centralized crypto markets and wallet providers, as well as from ISPs (Internet Service Providers).
-Vertical vs horizontal
+=Vertical vs horizontal =
 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2444569X26000843
 =Transparency by default=

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:45, 17 March 2026
Line 4:		Line 4:

	Transparency does not necessarily entails revealing the identity of [[participants]] (those who have created the data / information), although enough information about [[participation]] can allow triangulation and unmasking of anonymous [[participants]]. This is a problem with the [[Bitcoin]] network for example, which allows anonymous [[participation]] but [[participants]] can be unmasked by analyzing the ledger (history of transactions) and using information from centralized crypto markets and wallet providers, as well as from ISPs (Internet Service Providers).		Transparency does not necessarily entails revealing the identity of [[participants]] (those who have created the data / information), although enough information about [[participation]] can allow triangulation and unmasking of anonymous [[participants]]. This is a problem with the [[Bitcoin]] network for example, which allows anonymous [[participation]] but [[participants]] can be unmasked by analyzing the ledger (history of transactions) and using information from centralized crypto markets and wallet providers, as well as from ISPs (Internet Service Providers).
		+
		+	Vertical vs horizontal
		+	https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2444569X26000843

	=Transparency by default=		=Transparency by default=

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:32, 9 November 2024
Line 41:		Line 41:


−	Thus, transparency, like [[openness]], is not an ideological requirement, it has an economic rationale within the p2p paradigm. Without transparency open networks (or [[OVNs]]) cannot leverage [[crowdsourcing]] of talent and [[resources]], therefore they cannot benefit from lower opportunity costs and better allocation of [[resources]], loose their advantage over traditional firms and slip back into traditional organizational structures to stay alive.	+	Thus, transparency, like [[openness]], is not an ideological requirement, it has an economic rationale within the p2p paradigm. Without transparency open networks (or [[OVNs]]) cannot leverage [[crowdsourcing]] of talent and [[resources]], therefore they cannot benefit from lower opportunity costs and better allocation of [[resources]], loose their advantage over traditional firms and slip back into traditional organizational structures to stay alive. Unlike traditional firms, which see transparency and [[openness]] as vulnerabilities, open networks have mechanisms in place to leverage transparency and [[openness]] to their advantage. We can also say that, transparency and [[openness]] are not just advantageous, but '''vital''' to open networks.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-About access to information.
+Transparency is about access to information. See also [[openness]], i.e. access to participation.
 Open networks and communities exhibit a high degree of transparency, i.e. they provide public access to data and information about pretty much everything that can be published. This is about ''social translucence''. Access alone is not the only requirement for transparency, ''legebility'' is also important, i.e. formatting or structuring data and information to make it easily understandable by almost anyone. ''Serchability'' and ''inter-connectivity'' are other aspects of transparency. In other words, tools must be provided to search and retrieve information easily or to stumble upon information and be able to jump from one context to another. Wikipedia is a great example of a content management platform designed to maximize transparency.
-Transparency does not necessarily entails revealing the identity of [[participants]] (those who have created the data / information), although enough information about [[participation]] can allow triangulation and unmasking of anonymous [[participants]]. This is a problem with the Bitcoin network for example, which allows anonymous [[participation]] but [[participants]] can be unmasked by analyzing the ledger (history of transactions) and using information from centralized crypto markets and wallet providers, as well as and from ISPs (Internet Service Providers).
+Transparency does not necessarily entails revealing the identity of [[participants]] (those who have created the data / information), although enough information about [[participation]] can allow triangulation and unmasking of anonymous [[participants]]. This is a problem with the [[Bitcoin]] network for example, which allows anonymous [[participation]] but [[participants]] can be unmasked by analyzing the ledger (history of transactions) and using information from centralized crypto markets and wallet providers, as well as from ISPs (Internet Service Providers).
 =Transparency by default=
@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 * Forums: a messaging app like [https://discord.com/ Discord] or forums like [https://www.discourse.org/ Discourse] can be configured to provide anyone access to read the exchanges.
 * Knowledge and know how: a public Wiki
-* Decisions: [https://www.loomio.com/ Loomio] is a consensus-based decision making platform that allows a group to deliberate and make decisions in the public view.
+* Decisions: [https://www.loomio.com/ Loomio] is a consensus-based [[decision making]] platform that allows a group to deliberate and make decisions in the public view.
-* Workflows: [[NRP-CAS]] or [https://trello.com/ Trello] are tools that people use to manage tasks in the public view.
+* Workflows: [[NRP-CAS]] or [https://trello.com/ Trello] are tools that people use to steward tasks in the public view.
-[[Openness]] is access to [[participation]] or contribution. Thus, following the example of Google Drive, documents can also be set to anyone with the link can comment or edit. Open networks and communities may restrict access to comment only, in order to reduce spam, and put in place a barrier to entry for editing, for example joining the community.
+[[Openness]] is access to [[participation]] or [[contribution]]. Thus, following the example of Google Drive, documents can also be set to anyone with the link can comment or edit. Open networks and communities may restrict access to comment only, in order to reduce spam, and put in place a barrier to entry for editing, for example joining the community.
 =Methodologies of work=
-Open networks and communities prescribe processes or methods that enforce transparency. For example, when it comes to documenting work done, a Wiki can be prescribed with templates to structure the information.
+Open networks and communities prescribe processes or methods that enforce transparency. For example, when it comes to documenting work being done, a Wiki can be prescribed with templates to structure the information.
 =Time=
-''Transparency by default'' can be extended to ''real time transparency by default''. In other words, data and information is made public from the start of a process, without being massaged or polished. Thus, it is common practice within open networks and communities to open a document and make it public before one starts writing a report. This allows other [[participants]] to see the work in progress and contribute or intervene, which is required to leverage collaborative work and collective intelligence. See more on the section below about link to the p2p economics.
+''Transparency by default'' can be extended to ''real time transparency by default''. In other words, data and information is made public from the start of a process, without being massaged or polished. Thus, it is common practice within open networks and communities to open a document and make it public before one starts writing a report. This allows other [[participants]] to see the work in progress and contribute or intervene, which is required to leverage collaborative work and collective intelligence, allow [[stigmergy]]. See more on the section below about link to the p2p economics.
 =Culture=
-The open [[culture]] is a set of integrated values and norms that allows effortless [[participation]] in transparent processes. Being a [[participant]] in an open process requires a higher degree of awareness of the social context, since everything we say and do is publicly accessible in almost real time. Thus, people who evolve in close settings need to deploy more effort (think twice) before contributing in the public view. For someone accustomed with the open culture [[participating]] in an open process is second nature.
+The open [[culture]] is a set of integrated values and norms that allows effortless [[participation]] in transparent [[processes]]. Being a [[participant]] in an open process requires a higher degree of awareness of the social context, since everything we say and do is publicly accessible in almost real time. Thus, people who evolve in close settings need to deploy more effort (think twice) before contributing in the public view. For someone accustomed with the open culture [[participating]] in an open process is second nature.
 =Link to the p2p economics=
 Transparency, like [[openness]], is an important feature of open networks and communities ([[OVNs]] alike). According to [[Yochai Benkler]], open networks have two main advantages over traditional firms:
 # lower opportunity costs
-# better allocation of resources
+# better allocation of [[resources]]
-Lower opportunity costs means that open networks are very efficient at exploring the field of opportunities and converging on good ones. That is because they push sensing and sensemaking to the edge of the network, allowing even distant [[participants]] to input new ideas into a process. In order for that to function, open networks provide unhindered access to information (what's going on, what's the objective, etc.), which allows even someone who just passes-by to propose something.
+Lower opportunity costs means that open networks are very efficient at exploring the field of opportunities and converging on good ones. That is because they push sensing and sensemaking to the edge of the network, allowing even distant [[participants]] to input new ideas into a [[process]]. In order for that to function, open networks provide unhindered access to information (what's going on, what's the objective, etc.), which allows even someone who just passes-by to propose something.
-When it comes to allocation of resources, including matching talent to processes (human resource allocation) open networks rely on self-allocation. For example, someone who just discovers an open source project on a Wiki (content management tool, documentation) can jump to the workflow (task management tool) and see that the group struggles with an electronic problem. If this individual possesses the required skills and has some free time can decide to search the solution and post it to the group. Perhaps a specific instrument is also needed to make some measurements, the individual may be able to provide it or make the measurement him/her self. Or perhaps the group needs some funding to continue the development of the project, this individual can contribute to a [[crowdfunding]] campaign that has been set up for the project. Self-allocation stands in contrast with centrally planned allocation, where a managers need to decide on which projects to spend a budget and which employee to put on every project or who to hire to cover the required skills base and the workload. In order to allow self-allocation anyone on the edge of the network must have access to up-to-date information about the project.
+When it comes to allocation of [[resources]], including matching talent to [[processes]] (human resource allocation) open networks rely on self-allocation. For example, someone who just discovers an open source project on a Wiki (content management tool, documentation) can jump to the workflow (task management tool) and see that the group struggles with an electronic problem. If this individual possesses the required skills and has some free time can decide to search the solution and post it to the group. Perhaps a specific instrument is also needed to make some measurements, the individual may be able to provide it or make the measurement him/her self. Or perhaps the group needs some funding to continue the development of the project, this individual can contribute to a [[crowdfunding]] campaign that has been set up for the project. Self-allocation stands in contrast with centrally planned allocation, where a managers need to decide on which projects to spend a budget and which employee to put on every project or who to hire to cover the required skills base and the workload. In order to allow self-allocation anyone on the edge of the network must have access to up-to-date information about the project.
-Thus, transparency, like [[openness]], is not an ideological requirement, it has an economic rationale within the p2p paradigm. Without transparency open networks (or [[OVNs]]) cannot leverage crowdsourcing of talent and resources, therefore they cannot benefit from lower opportunity costs and better allocation of resources, loose their advantage over traditional firms and slip back into traditional organizational structures to stay alive.
+Thus, transparency, like [[openness]], is not an ideological requirement, it has an economic rationale within the p2p paradigm. Without transparency open networks (or [[OVNs]]) cannot leverage [[crowdsourcing]] of talent and [[resources]], therefore they cannot benefit from lower opportunity costs and better allocation of [[resources]], loose their advantage over traditional firms and slip back into traditional organizational structures to stay alive.
-Important note: At the same time, transparency provides real time information about important choices made by the [[organisation]] to competitive [[agents]] within the larger ecosystem, which can become a disadvantage. This is akin to the predator having access to the thought process of the pray, predicting every move even before it happens. The only defense in this situation of information asymmetry within a competitive environment is to become the ''lion of the savanna'', i.e. to have no threatening competition in the area of the organisaton's core expertise.
+Important note: At the same time, transparency provides real time information about important choices made by the [[organisation]] to competitive [[agents]] within the larger ecosystem, which can become a disadvantage. This is akin to the predator having access to the thought process of the pray, predicting every move even before it happens. The only defence in this situation of information asymmetry within a competitive environment is to become the ''cheetah of the savanna'', i.e. to have no threatening competition in the area of the organisaton's core expertise, innovate fast.
 ==Transparency and stigmergy==
-[[OVNs]] move away from planning and reply more on [[stigmergy]]. Transparency is required for stigmergy to function, granting any agents access to all information and thus allowing him/her to consider a course of action. [[Openness]], i.e. access to processes is also required to make the action possible.
+[[OVNs]] move away from [[planning]] and reply more on [[stigmergy]]. Transparency is required for [[stigmergy]] to function, granting any agents access to all information and thus allowing him/her to consider a course of action. [[Openness]], i.e. access to [[processes]] is also required to make the action possible.

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 Open networks and communities exhibit a high degree of transparency, i.e. they provide public access to data and information about pretty much everything that can be published. Access alone is not the only requirement for transparency, ''legebility'' is also important, i.e. formatting or structuring data and information to make it easily understandable by almost anyone. ''Serchability'' and ''inter-connectivity'' are other aspects of transparency. In other words, tools must be provided to search and retrieve information easily or to stumble upon information and be able to jump from one context to another. Wikipedia is a great example of a content management platform designed to maximize transparency.
-Transparency does not necessarily entails revealing the identity of participants (those who have created the data / information), although enough information about participation can allow triangulation and unmasking of anonymous participants. This is a problem with the Bitcoin network for example, which allows anonymous participation but participants can be unmasked by analyzing the ledger (history of transactions) and using information from centralized crypto markets and wallet providers, as well as and from ISPs (Internet Service Providers).
+Transparency does not necessarily entails revealing the identity of [[participants]] (those who have created the data / information), although enough information about [[participation]] can allow triangulation and unmasking of anonymous [[participants]]. This is a problem with the Bitcoin network for example, which allows anonymous [[participation]] but [[participants]] can be unmasked by analyzing the ledger (history of transactions) and using information from centralized crypto markets and wallet providers, as well as and from ISPs (Internet Service Providers).
 =Transparency by default=
-It is an approach that utilizes tools and makes use of practices that expose data and information (content) to the public, by default. This requires participants to acquire the open culture (see below), since every communication and recorded action can immediately be seen by others. We experience this situation when we have a private discussion at home with family members versus when we interact with friends around the table in a restaurant.
+It is an approach that utilizes tools and makes use of practices that expose data and information (content) to the public, by default. This requires [[participants]] to acquire the open culture (see below), since every communication and recorded action can immediately be seen by others. We experience this situation when we have a private discussion at home with family members versus when we interact with friends around the table in a restaurant.
 ''Transparency by default'' can be extended to ''real time transparency by default'' (see section about time below).
@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 * Workflows: [[NRP-CAS]] or [https://trello.com/ Trello] are tools that people use to manage tasks in the public view.
-[[Openness]] is access to participation or contribution. Thus, following the example of Google Drive, documents can also be set to anyone with the link can comment or edit. Open networks and communities may restrict access to comment only, in order to reduce spam, and put in place a barrier to entry for editing, for example joining the community.
+[[Openness]] is access to [[participation]] or contribution. Thus, following the example of Google Drive, documents can also be set to anyone with the link can comment or edit. Open networks and communities may restrict access to comment only, in order to reduce spam, and put in place a barrier to entry for editing, for example joining the community.
 =Methodologies of work=
@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 =Time=
-''Transparency by default'' can be extended to ''real time transparency by default''. In other words, data and information is made public from the start of a process, without being massaged or polished. Thus, it is common practice within open networks and communities to open a document and make it public before one starts writing a report. This allows other participants to see the work in progress and contribute or intervene, which is required to leverage collaborative work and collective intelligence. See more on the section below about link to the p2p economics.
+''Transparency by default'' can be extended to ''real time transparency by default''. In other words, data and information is made public from the start of a process, without being massaged or polished. Thus, it is common practice within open networks and communities to open a document and make it public before one starts writing a report. This allows other [[participants]] to see the work in progress and contribute or intervene, which is required to leverage collaborative work and collective intelligence. See more on the section below about link to the p2p economics.
 =Culture=
-The open [[culture]] is a set of integrated values and norms that allows effortless participation in transparent processes. Being a participant in an open process requires a higher degree of awareness of the social context, since everything we say and do is publicly accessible in almost real time. Thus, people who evolve in close settings need to deploy more effort (think twice) before contributing in the public view. For someone accustomed with the open culture participating in an open process is second nature.
+The open [[culture]] is a set of integrated values and norms that allows effortless [[participation]] in transparent processes. Being a [[participant]] in an open process requires a higher degree of awareness of the social context, since everything we say and do is publicly accessible in almost real time. Thus, people who evolve in close settings need to deploy more effort (think twice) before contributing in the public view. For someone accustomed with the open culture [[participating]] in an open process is second nature.
 =Link to the p2p economics=
@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 # better allocation of resources
-Lower opportunity costs means that open networks are very efficient at exploring the field of opportunities and converging on good ones. That is because they push sensing and sensemaking to the edge of the network, allowing even distant participants to input new ideas into a process. In order for that to function, open networks provide unhindered access to information (what's going on, what's the objective, etc.), which allows even someone who just passes-by to propose something.
+Lower opportunity costs means that open networks are very efficient at exploring the field of opportunities and converging on good ones. That is because they push sensing and sensemaking to the edge of the network, allowing even distant [[participants]] to input new ideas into a process. In order for that to function, open networks provide unhindered access to information (what's going on, what's the objective, etc.), which allows even someone who just passes-by to propose something.
 When it comes to allocation of resources, including matching talent to processes (human resource allocation) open networks rely on self-allocation. For example, someone who just discovers an open source project on a Wiki (content management tool, documentation) can jump to the workflow (task management tool) and see that the group struggles with an electronic problem. If this individual possesses the required skills and has some free time can decide to search the solution and post it to the group. Perhaps a specific instrument is also needed to make some measurements, the individual may be able to provide it or make the measurement him/her self. Or perhaps the group needs some funding to continue the development of the project, this individual can contribute to a [[crowdfunding]] campaign that has been set up for the project. Self-allocation stands in contrast with centrally planned allocation, where a managers need to decide on which projects to spend a budget and which employee to put on every project or who to hire to cover the required skills base and the workload. In order to allow self-allocation anyone on the edge of the network must have access to up-to-date information about the project.