Note: OGM Forum is no longer active. This is a static snapshot as of February 2022. You can browse the site to see posts, but the functional features of the site will not work. You can search or download a zip archive of the files from the site at github/OpenGlobalMind/

'Peeragogy Quest', Deluxe

Continuing the discussion from Potential quests, reducks:

A somewhat thought-through discussion of this goal is on offer in the paper “Patterns of Peeragogy”. As for why it matters, one go-to source is the NYT article “How to Save the Amazon Without Condescending to Brazil” by Roberto Mangabeira Unger:

The only system with a chance of saving both the people and the trees is a knowledge economy.

That’s not going to magically happen without some effort. Peeragogy, as a synthesis of peer learning and peer production can help. BUT the available time is limited, hence a call to action. Obviously there are lots of other calls to action around “ecology”, “citizen action” and so on; Peeragogy — like some of the other efforts around OGM — should ideally help many such efforts work better.

I’ll mention that I’m “live blogging” a plan of revisions for the Peeragogy Handbook v4 via the “Peeragogy-Handbook” mailing list: — in effect, the small “actions” I’m describing there are mini-Handbooks (but for contributors rather than passive readers). I thank @lovolution @skreutzer and others who participated in the MetaCAugs/Augment Reading Group in November 2019 for taking on a significant “editorial” role!

That’s is an important part of the workflow that we only figured out ≈3 years after publishing the latest edition of the Handbook! Hopefully we can reduce the cycle time for the 4th Ed.

I hope that some people will take me up on my request for feedback/critique. It would be nice to have a cohort of quest-level “peers” so that we could learn from each other at the project level. Is OGM itself a quest? Are there others?

Any ideas about who are the “problem holders” here? I suppose I could reach out to R.M. Unger… his Nesta Whitepaper also seems relevant:

An obvious point of critique is that something on a ≈5 year scale needs to be broken down into smaller bite-sized pieces to become more actionable. Are these also quests, or are they merely “tasks”? Either way, part of the breakdown should also be some attention towards making them meaningful/valuable — so far, “learning” has been the main incentive in focus, but some of my other efforts also try to engage with peer production as an economic force: that’s described at with ongoing work appearing at and brief updates at

I want to emphasise that as a “call to action” there are many options here: reading, reflection, discourse, writing, viewing, criticising…


right on joe, stellar exposition !!

setting a high bar !!