Spanish speakers will get next an automatic
translation of this message which can only
be useful if they correlate with the source.

Dear De,

>Daniel, when you started the project how long did you
>expect it to last? Was there any sense of "life span"

I have no precise answer but yes, in Funredes, we are
very sensitive on the concept of homeostasis and we
do not believe in systems which keep existing just
because they have existed.

Funredes itself should (would) disappear if (when)
its mission will be fulfilled.

If we come back to 1999, when Ricardo Gómez, who
I barely knew at that time, as a new IDRC project
officer, suggested me to summit projects to his
department, I sent him 5 different projects. His
answer was "No! I do not want to fund one or
several small projects; I want a good and
comprehensive project".

This way he induced the creation of MISTICA as
a project of many objectives spread between
two orthogonal axes: content and methodology.

The objectives was, within a research-action
and process minded project:

CONTENT
1) Strengthen the ICT4D field players through
collaborative work
2) Create a Human Network for ICT ownership
and research
3) Establish regional diagnostic and agenda
for action METHOD
4) Provide state of the art platform integrating
web and discussion list
5) Provide state of the art ethical process
for virtual community
6) Provide innovative experiments with
methodologies (with linguistic diversity
and participation main priorities).

In my opinion, the objectives which was best
reached were:
- #2 (Human Network) this is why the today
situation is hurting many people;
- #6 (methodologies) EMEC experiment was
requested to be published in the best
European scientifical journals
http://www.upgrade-cepis.org/issues/2002/1/up3-1Pimienta.pdf)
... but no money was found to continue PAD,
EMEC and other experiments and we just sticked
to simple experiments http://funredes.org/tradauto
(we were too much in advance);
- and #5 (Ethical VC) gaining MISTICA
international fame as a model of virtual
community in that area (to start checking try:
http://www.google.com/search?q=mistica+virtual+community

MISTICA made good contributions to #1 (ICT4D players)
and http://redistic.org emerged, as well as many
collaborative projects on the side after the
wonderful experience of MISTICA pilot applications.

MISTICA made a fair contribution to #4 (platform),
preceding the emergence of Content Management
System using PHP (but is obviously obsolete 8
years after, when new objects emerged such as
Wiki and Blog, and new innovative forms of VC
happens such as Secondlife) and because the last
attempt to enhance the platform came short
(mainly due to the challenge of migrating
such a huge web site).

In spite of the interesting promises of
OLISTICA (another collaborative project)
MISTICA always came short in #3 (action) and
the main reason may have to do with the today
situation: the limits of participation and the
sustainability of projects.
Are the limits of participation intrinsical?
Are they bound to some methodologic mistake in
the design?
Are they cultural?
I do not have the answer and this does
deserve study.

MISTICA, in my opinion, will be recorded as a
project having a strong influence in the field
but not of a project having incidence. MISTICA
effects were in shaping civil society vision and
therefore influencing policy makers by educating
and with constructed ideas; but definitively not
in direct incidence in public policies.

Finally in the research-action balance, research
came higher than action, and research is an
ongoing process were Phoenix is always present
and this maybe why surprisingly I personally
feel less worried than many of you with the
idea of reaching the end of that step...

Reading myself again I hope that newcomers
will understand that the raw discussion list
is just the tip of the tip of the tip of the
iceberg which does not mean the members
were/are not the engine of the whole process...

Let's try to answer now your question of life span.

#1 (strengthening the ICT4D field).
We provided an impulse; then came the WSIS
process and that changed the situation.

I tend to consider that there is a pre-WSIS and
post-WSIS period and I am comfortable to say
that Mistica may have come to an end in that
objective. In pre-WSIS, MISTICA role was key;
during WSIS it turned to be one of the players
(mostly for its capacity to shape ideas and
process minded vision). During WSIS, MISTICA
was not capable to impose its methodological
advances and global civil society made wonderful
contributions in content, learnt a lot in process,
but came short in remote participation (MISTICA
could has been a leader and was not, maybe because
Funredes was weakening).

After WSIS, the context has radically changed
and new strategies are required. All governments
are developing Information Society strategies and
programs and substantial budgets are involved.
Time of civil society paving the ground is clearly
OVER. If we want to see our vision succeed we need
to reach out on governments:
- either by direct policy incidence
- either by participating in multistakeholder approaches,
- either by direct consulting.

Influence importance is paramount but it is a
medium term strategy whereas short term results
are needed now.

Within the WSIS process APC came out as the natural
global leader for policy incidence in ICT4D field
and demonstrate clear ethical capacity in the
collaborating process. The logical conclusion is
that FUNREDES joined APC as many other players.

#2 Has the MISTICA human network came to an end?
I don’t know for sure and I hope not, but yes, I am
afraid, in its actual form...

Mistica was deliberately aimed to be a close
network for (high level) professionals of that
field; it has lost that property subtly and now
it is not clear what it is.

There are many functions performed in the discussion
list which, like the Mistica project, deserve now
to be disaggregated:
1- Systematic watch of what happen in the field
2- Spontaneous discussion on the previous (in my
opinion, it has lost the magic of the first years,
maybe because many subjects has already been
processed and maybe also because the threshold of
professionalism has been decreasing)
3- Coordinated discussion to create collective
content (the last was on South South Cooperation,
and the wealth of Mistica is there, although this
requires the two previous functions ...
and budgets to perform).

The watch is probably the only function which
nobody wants to loose (in my opinion it has
always be the glue of the list)... but this is
a "newsletter" type of function and could be
resolved that way. An idea could be to try
to convince APC Policy Monitor (an outstanding
product) to add a one way subscription list
(with no discussion) gathering watch
information from membership (it does have
a cost however since somebody needs to
filter and organize).

The signal over noise of the second is
decreasing, themes are popping recurrently
and sometimes it is just a replay of previous
discussions. The professional level is often
threatened by newcomers. I think it has come to
an end in its actual form. May be a solution is
to leave discussions pop in close groups in a
web forum? This could be a function attached to
the watch, in a way virtual newspaper function.

And if some people wants to invite the community
members (I said invite, I do not say enroll) in
their own initiative to maintain discussion, be
my guest (and shall the best one win more membership).

The third is the most extraordinary part of MISTICA
but it cannot run without rules, method, conduction
and budget. If somebody keeps pretending the
opposite, I suggest he creates his own platform
and bring the proof of his word by acting. The
world belongs to who builds it. Taran has left by
impatience but I love his Michelangelo quote
"criticize by creating"…

#3 Mistica is not the place for policy incidence.
APC is the best place today and REDISTIC and other
initiatives should take a place.

#4 (platform) Mistica has come to an end.
It is a historical window of the state of the art
of a past period. Funredes Think Tank is not
working any more in that area. So if somebody
else wants to propose a good and modern platform
for the future, just do it.

#5 (VC ethics) Proofs has been made ... even
in relation with the most difficult situation
to deal with: remember
http://funredes.org/cuest_mod/informe/!
Time to go and apply to another field or to
create something new. I am with you Capurro.

#6 Researches and experiment never end.
Is MISTICA platform a good place for
experimenting? Yes, but less and less
as it is.

Coming back to the beginning I tend to
think that it is time now to disaggregate
what were the original pieces of MISTICA
and to take separate decision for each piece:
- Let go what is over;
- Migrate somewhere or redo what is not over but
need reshape.
- Let die and made reborn the most promising
research-action elements.

In the last category belongs CVA that Mapa has
hold for some time. Also belongs Capurro's
proposal. Also belongs Diffractor, a personal
initiative that I have shared with a very few
about a new way to brainstorm asynchronously
at distance.
And probably belongs many other ideas that
members feel they need to push ahead in a
collaborative manner. This door is open even
if the site is frozen and the discussion
list in hold.

I believe Mistica, as it is, is over as a
comprehensive project.
To remain in the mathematics of MISTICA (see
http://funredes.org/mistica/castellano/proyecto/matematica_mistica.rtf
who wants to understand this reference)

My new equation would be:
Phoenix(MISTICA) = a chaotic differential
equation with some unknown and high
integration potential on History(Mistica)...

Thanks De for asking the right questions
and reminding us that English, as well as
French, Portuguese, Dutch and many more
indigenous languages are part of the
language sphere of Latin America and
the Caribbean.
Nearby jue 01 feb 2007 10:19:16 AST