he intelligence tattoo is same to has ii starring derivations- from the polynesian formulate ta which means dramatic entity and the tahitian son tatau mjhgjg77j which agency to marking entity . the history of tattoo began terminated 5000 long time ago and is as different as the people world health organization outwear them . tattoos are created by inserting blackened materials beneath the skins show up . the starting time tattoos plausibly were created by accident . person had a lilliputian injury , and rubbed it with a helping hand that was illegal with soot and ashes from the discharge . once the wounding had healed , they proverb that a sign stayed for good . despite the swarming sciences' ontogeny enthrallment with tattooing , and the vast popularity of tattoos themselves , the rehearse has not odd often of a past read . bronzy years in 1991 , a quint one thousand year antediluvian tattooed gentleman the icing valet successful the headlines of newspapers all the finished the universe when his glacial torso was observed on a mount 'tween oesterreich and italy . this is the trump crystalized corpse of that stop always constitute . the scramble bears 57 tattoos a baffle on the indoor of the leftfield stifle , sextuplet vertical lines 15 centimeters farseeing preceding the kidneys and many latitude lines on the ankles . the pose of the tattoo marks suggests that they were in all probability practical for therapeutic reasons discourse of arthritis .

Where I can find good quality films?
Can anyone help me?

Edited by author 07-09-2007 11:35 AM

sustainability defines pairs of compound future exponentials: collaboration now

news just in form http://passports.jp : espians one mistake at 24 weeks to date : targeting million person webs around a billion dolar market instead of a trillion dolar one

..even though all ours sustainabilities depend on its open collaboration branding

(guest welcomes - million person web supporter David W http://www.quicktopic.com/16/H/CC9CSxdrmA2t )

IMO EXPLANTION
Personally I beleive prime mistake was assuming that collaboration market space has a value of only 1 billion.. I think its well over a trillion dollars but achieving this will require the overthrow of 90% of all global management consultants and non-flow professions/academics

but then I am a gandhian- overthrowing professions is what Mahatma did to my maternal grandad as senior judge in mumbai region in 1920s (story's happy ending went from imprisoning gandhi when believing old professional system rules to rewriting legalese for India's Independence)

SUPPOSE I AM RIGHT
-are enough of us up to collaborating around the overthrow of mancon1.0 and professions1.0 and their untruth media wherever it lurks or addicts http://worldclassbrands.tv

it seems to me that trust mapping goes to the very heart, love and courage of this... but over the last 24 years for me that has emerged around playing 3 open source games, all as simple as they are counter-intuitive if you live in a one way world of command and control management but that's not the same as darn self-organising either, the entrepreneurial clue is and always has been co-working http://www.normanmacrae.com/intrapreneur.html :

THREE GAMES Micro to Inter to Macro not other way

one at micro level of your own social netwirk map, or personal brand architecture/partnership

one at communal level of media we need so that brands that save the world's sustainability cost nothing to npropagate whilst those that end sustainability go above their current billion dollar budgets to disintegrating

a compound opposite audit/mapping maths to the one currently in power of how much can we grab from the world each quarter

some more details on all of above flows at
http://wiki.espians.com/Trust

the economics language that's easiest to open source with goal to recapture whole truth involves:
future history http://www.normanmacrae.com/netfuture.html

entrepreneurs 1000 cases where social begets strong economies not vice versa

system transformations of entrepreneurial revolution - my family tree has 207 or 24 years of picking stories on those topics as I try to review at
http://wiki.espians.com/User:Entrepreneur76

so we come to the bottom line question- does any of the above have interest to the 1000 people we are inviting to meet one another at end of July, and if there's stuff that is of equal or higher interest which wiki pages have you all put it on?

thanks you if you read this far
chris macrae us tel 301 881 1655 http://erworld.tv http://ecomap.tv
cause: http://apps.facebook.com/causes/view_cause...ecruiter_id=2212610

hi-trust map 1 of 20 needed around video host

ps if i forgot to send this to someone who entrepreneurially understands media and mediation and system transformation I should have flowed in a first 20 please fire away at me

million person webs at facebook: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=3276035219

 اخذ دعوتنامه نمايشگاهي فوري از اروپا
تهران: 88631613

Edited by author 07-09-2007 11:32 AM
pledgebank.com has helped us (open space types of folk at http://clubofdc9.blogspot.com where David cheerled Organisational Democracy last October and http://osoflondon.blogspot.com) where Queen Elizabeth 2 remains one of only 2 mega-powerful people of global influence (whose consistency of values I know how to map) whose lips support humanity's connections with goodwill with every uteerance -and 200 supporters of www.catcomm.org - understand how the million person web works in the first form we discussed. I think we may now need to move on.

For example if we look at the children's version of David's Loose Connections, it seems to me that it is time that a million parents pledged to add one topic dialogue each to growing up as a 9 to 13 year old in the networked world of the future not the separatist world of the past

why 9? it could be 10 to 14 or whatever 5 yeear learning curve most opens up the vales and self-confidences you open source for the rest of your life as well as the ways you use the internet tools to find your own best co-mentors through life and help others do likewise

why girls? because selfishly I have a nine year old daugter to parent but also because the 21st C wont survive unless we have as many nurturing leaders as the 20th C had male rambos. I am not wanting to be sexist here; if men will learn from women in the most open of collaborative ways, fine. But where do you start a curriculum between 9-13 years when so mich of its future is oin conflict withy the examination by sperate facts that dumbing down and narrow cultural forms of schooling have become in West and North's richest and carboised most filthy places?

http://ninenow.blogspot.com
http://searchtheresa.blogspot.com

We are looking at every way of making water the number 1 humanitarian uniting challenge between summer 2004 and summer 2005 - a multimillion person web - and once this crusade for humanity has made waves, we hope to relay on to another for 2005-06

We includes churches from many nations and faiths

Change movement networks of all kinds

Expert whistleblowers on the corporate and government irresponsibilities of water

Huge gatherings of people, and demographic (peer-peer) networks

Others who want to adopt one great change the world cause back so human beings can walk tall in collaboration with their fellwo species and the joy of being

Send us your bookmark so we can program it in above if you and your peers are adopting this in spirit, action or pledge

Edited by author 07-04-2004 05:37 AM
Hi

Two almost incredible emergences spotted in Europe

-http://www.simpol.org.uk looks like an unstoppable million person web

-introducing itself as a celebration of the 5th anniversary of http://www.cluetrain.com, the EQnomy manifesto has been launched http://www.eqnomie.nl/index.php?page=home&lang=eng

Why dont we take the ratings/valuations of companies away from city analysts and the powerful , and put it democratically in the hands of social networks, millions of the world's people on the net around the local grassroots of responsibility

To begin with we can call it a Valuation Fantasy-Reality Game . Mathematically I propose a multiplicative index that goes for 0 to 625 with 1 being the start index of each company and the index being a predictor of the companies total monetary and social growth in a generations time

The nice thing about the multiplier index is if a company does anything totally rotten it gets down valued to zero which is quite a realistic model of how reputational capital works. Of course, proposed re-ratings of companies are subject to conversational threads so we can open up the evidence on what a company is doing that is so transparently good or evils. And technically Transparency valuations are already built around the connectivity of 4 major territories of system organisation which is where we get 0 to 625 when we rate a company's transparency performance standard on each territory with a maturity profile of 0 to 5

I think we could easily co-portalise input and league tables of this game around many of the world's largest social online communities. And in the process turn a Fantasy League pretty close to Reality because in one sense we are simply cataloguing how well or evilly a company performs for humanity and its stakeholders in a structured way. Eventually any self-respecting analyst will want to see that open book information

Edited by author 09-24-2002 02:05 PM
The Million People Web 2002 currently emerging from
New Zealand/ S. Hemisphere: :: UK/N.Hemisphere
________________________________________________________
Network Party: In celebration of the birth of value multiply

---

Would you like to live in a world where the most powerful brand has the biggest image or is known for fostering the most human responsibility? If you have a dream favouring the latter : the way to start this is to develop a collaboration strategy between all humanitarian networks that put responsibility ahead of image. Later this year, I intend to help convene a party of representatives of 15 of the most human online networks. Who would you nominate to attend?

Technical background on Value Multiply, aka Safety in Transparency


It is becoming clear from Transparency Mapping at www.valuetrue.com that companies who do not understand that system connectivity is often better represented by a multiplicative model than an additive one are a danger to themselves (of losing all value) and to everyone

If we look at the risk side the beginners question is when can a company's value be reduced to zero due to the connectivity of the primary dynamics involved

We know this can happen with relationship capital - eg Andersen one rotten stakeholder relationship zeroising the value of all stakeholders

I am sure it will happen soon in the case of (image)*(responsibility) - do we already have a case where a company was so concerned with its image that its responsibility was exposed as zero and thus so was its whole? If not, it will happen soon as activists bring transparency to responsibility

There are probably other cases like (KM technology)*(KM human usability) =0 because somebody thought Knowledge Management was all technology and no human use. What's your favourite example

When we get to system of systems, a really intriguing case will be
(competition over supplying positive demands)*(collaboration over risks/responsibilities)
-clearly this is a reason why poor world gaps never get narrowed but who will be called first to zero account as an industry whose competitive nature over products caused it to forget to collaborate over risk

These are just examples. I would love to hear of other ones you might like to embed on tracks across our Map at www.valuetrue.com

Equally if we index the way companies behave today at 1 and compounded this impact over the next generation , it is clear that many will head down towards zero due to the multiplier rule. The interesting question is what could the upside be: my best estimate is 625 though only 25 of this is monetary and the other 25 social (the sort of dividend) that could narrow poor world gaps

You might ask why this issue defines our future in ways that it has not previously done. well 5/6 of value in global markets today is known to be to do with living people connectivity -knowledge, brand, networks, innovation etc - not tangible things; information is getting more open and it is only when people ask the question do we accept that 500 million dollars spent on a global brand's image and zero on responsibility of marketing, that the world says actually no we don't -lets zeroise those who persist in such dehumanising of us all. In other words, many of the multipliers in the equations above were unknown in non-transparent ages, but when light is first shone on them there will be a mother of all zeroising of share values. And do not forget there is a little concept called the internet. In every way this system produces : connectivity, openness, living relationship patterns come first. So the trend is unstoppably towards transparency's multiplier rule. And companies who dont how to map value multiplication would I suggest be timely ones to withdraw any pension investment you have in them (or is there a counterargument?)

Edited by author 09-18-2002 05:21 AM

The Million People Web 2002 currently emerging from
New Zealand/ S. Hemisphere: :: UK/N.Hemisphere
________________________________________________________


Some loosely related conversations:


yes John - Catalytic Mechanisms by Jim Collins is probably the only paper in HBR I have found worth reading - or are you referring to an update?, the original I recall was at least 4 years ago - certainly a favourite and largely what the design of Million People Webs http://www.valuetrue.com/home/glossary.cfm is about - each pledge needs to be designed as a catalyst to change the systems of systems - so is there any neighbouring theory on how one catalyses systems ( also called pranks by Marjorie Kelly when you tease capitalism into chnaging its rotten laws)

and Jim's web is quite cool http://www.jimcollins.com/
----- Original Message -----
From: "john" <john@grouppartners.net>
To: "Chris Macrae" <wcbn007@easynet.co.uk>
Sent: 18 September 2002 8:16 AM
Subject: Reply to your posting at the Group Partners Forums


I want to point you to HBR Jim Collins work on Catalytic Mechanisms..see July Aug HBR...J
>
> > Will - thanks for all the childrens\' bookmarks - lots of fun and insight for all -chris
> >
> > Other favourites in my kid\'s catalogue is:
> > http://www.earthcharter.org/education/
> > (do we have any links with the people who revolve that?)
http://www.smallpieces.com/kids/ what the webs all about by David Weinberger


some jolly timely conversations going on at this European Union space under the chief hosting of Helen Baxter a Brit who telecommutes from New Zealand:
 
http://www.knowledgeboard.com/forum/0/0/181
-so if you are asking people to give their time to a great network, why not confront the issue of being a hybrid of not-for-profit and profit? and the issue of how you flow across like minded territories (aka networks of people)
 
http://www.knowledgeboard.com/cgi-bin/foru...opic=66&comment=239
those who would identify the dna they want to plant and move might like to know: there are (as far as I know) only 2 types of organisation: those whose unique purpose openly unites everyone, and those not worth a relationship...The price of anything is the amount of life you pay for it." Henry David Thoreau

Edited by author 09-13-2002 06:15 AM
The Million People Web 2002 currently emerging from
New Zealand/ S. Hemisphere: :: UK/N.Hemisphere
________________________________________________________

Thinking aloud here: I'm wondering if we could do a pledge around the Water Angels movemement that Freyja is helping to coordinate out of New Zealand and various people around our European Union are helping with

Here is an emerging plot. Any ideas on how to give this more web power to the people.

The 1000 Water Angels

My pledge as a Water Angel is to write to the Water Board I am a customer of and to ask what does anyone in their company do that specifically helps people in the poor world with desperate need of drinking water. We are compiling an online public scoreboard and your rating will be zero unless you provide an answer we can scale

0=No expressed Interest
5=Does stuff that the world should know about
(intermediary gradings 1 to 4 still to be verbalised)

If my Water Board replies I will send the reply to the grading centre. Once there are one Thousand Water Angels we will celebrate by circulating our communal knowledge pack, and those interested in this issue can then further the cause by leading local briefings etc confident in the knowledge that we have world class research to feedback to our local communities.

More Details on EU Water Angels

chris macrae
ps could people who are alredy subscribed to this Quicktopic thread drop me a line to wcbn007@easynet.co.uk; that way I cut out cross-posting to you

Edited by author 09-11-2002 09:12 AM
The Million People Web 2002 currently emerging from
New Zealand/ S. Hemisphere: :: UK/N.Hemisphere
________________________________________________________

Wonderful article Freyja - thanks so much for digging it out

The whole area of regulations - when they have responsibility and economics impacts that are desirable for our whole world's system and when they unitentionally bureaucratise or legalise us to death is a big concern

One of the interesting dynamics about Million People Webs if they ever became a catalogue of reverese referendums is at least they would test the water as to where large numbers of people believed there was a better system design. This would not prevent dialogue in which it turned out that the original pledge was sub-optimal but it would put the onus on big powers to openly explain why they had not tried alternative experiments (as in our global responsibility promnotion case) or what more expert side-effects people should know about before hastily voting against something. I believe such dialogues would turn out to be extraordinary good use of www, and I am sure that the populace is intelligent enough to find such conversations compulsive viewing.

I suppose this train of thought leads two ways:
-Do we build the Nerve Centre of Million People Webs ourselves?

 OR
 do we ask someone like Yahoo (if we can find a Responsible someone) why on earth don't they start mobilising Million People Webs?


__________________________________________________
Guided Tour : How The Web We'll Win
W:: W :: W

Edited by author 09-11-2002 08:11 AM
Hi all, Freyja here. Just dipping my toe into the conversation. I came across this paper today and thought it may be of interest to you guys.

"Making Corporations Accountable".

One of the examples used is the campaign by the NGO INFACT against the Swiss TNC Nestlé. They demanded that the company stop marketing powdered milk formula in poor countries, because unclean water used with the powder led to high infant death of many infants. It's encouraging that this boycott of Nestlé products eventually resulted in the WHO establishing an International Code of Marketing for Breast Milk Substitutes and suggests that we at least have a chance of success.

They also cover the use of voluntary codes, and regulatory and legal approaches.

Hope it's of use.

Edited by author 09-03-2002 12:54 PM
I've started a space for familial project ideas to The Million People Web directly following the join-up area
UK/ N. Hemisphere http://www.valuetrue.com/home/glossary.cfm

Tell me if you have a concept you like displayed


Example: Twin the world's richest cities and poorest rurals

So cities twin internationally but why don't the big cities twin with poor foreign rurals. Imagine if New York chose 10 foreign poverty areas to twin with. What a chance to exchange real understanding and plan social good. Now we are networked: wouldn't this be a simple (direct) way of developing information channels and projects for young New Yorkers with extra time on their hands to engage in. Imagine other cities ASPing similar experiences. And wouldn't this be one of the best ways of promoting the humanity of activism worldwide? Get to it you tourist boards and city governors. If you can twin with foreign cities, why wouldn't it do a world of good -and boost tourist feel-goods - to twin with poor foreign rurals?

Getting businesses (all businesses) to act responsibly and ethically is increasing in importance. Some useful suggestions about what do to and how are on www.authenticbusiness.co.uk

See particularly the speech given by Mark Barden of Barden & Jelly:
http://www.authenticbusiness.co.uk/docs/articles/apg.htm

 APG conference, “Changing minds in America”
Advertising and the transition to sustainable capitalism
Mark has written and delivered a sublime invitation to the global advertising industry. Mark is inviting advertising agencies to find a new sense of relevance for their creativity in helping their clients to work for sustainability. It is a quite brilliant balance of good business sense with idealism. It was originally written and delivered as a speech to an advertising industry conference in San Francisco. Mike described the response he got as “overwhelming”, he will be writing more about that response in the next issue.

Edited by author 09-02-2002 08:12 AM
Guided Tour : How The Web We'll Win
W:: W :: W

The Million People Web 2002 currently emerging from
New Zealand/ S. Hemisphere: http://www.jyanet.com/info-pledge.htm
UK/ N. Hemisphere http://www.valuetrue.com/home/glossary.cfm


This just in from Steven Howard posted at The Million Consumer Web poll at Fast Company

We cannot rely on political and government bodies to fix the problems of the world, even though the world today needs a \"Marshall Plan\" to fight global hunger and to protect the earth\'s environment. Perhaps this initiative just might get enough corporations, and shareholders, engaged in helping those who desparately need help.
------------------------------

Steven has put his finger on the catalytic mechanism nicely. We seek to engage all global coporates and through them collaborations with all governments, activist networks

In my mind there are least 2 serious problems with the world;s top 100 (or top 500 economic superpowers - now an odd cocktail of global corporates and national governments)

1) They are not collaborating on poor world and other responsibility projects in any pattern that can give the deperate billion+ without water or food or safety any hope. And when people lose hope in a technology connected world, the world loses

2) Most of these 500 top powers hate all the best things the net could do because it brings transparency to things they like keeping secret and it distributes power away from them

So that's why The Million Consumer Web is pledged generally so that we can make collaborative interventions (that doesn't stop sector specific interventions within it). Now please could we focus on how to build the web portals and get the network invites out.

Edited by author 09-01-2002 11:38 AM
Guided Tour : How The Web We'll Win
W:: W :: W

The Million People Web 2002 emerging from http://www.valuetrue.com/home/glossary.cfm


David I think all of these things (including some specific projects I've been planning for a year specifically, and 18 since our futures group started debating webbed societies) cascade into each other but only if you find the smallest but common-most perturbation of the system to start with.

Signing up consumers generally -we want responsibility collaboration as well as image from all global companies with a future - doesnt stop more targeted lobbying of particular sectors; BUT signing up consumers narrowly kills the permission to develop web models of collaboration for every responsibility.

Most of our specific collaboration projects like EU Water Angels require grassroots consumers as well as corporations. Many of the Million will have patched together their own local sub-webs, whether or not we tried to organise because socially that's how peer to peer viral pledging builds. Also the more inclusive we are of all industries, the more existing responsibility groups can join in filtered by ones that have economic as well as social models - it is completely possible to design win-win between economic productivities and social responsibilities. We just need the opinion spaces for letting that webbing and multiplying. In fact, we also need to appeal to the responsible humanitarian middle ground not the deep issue extremists that already campaign against specific industries.

The perturbation I seek is the smallest one that lets the net integrate into the mass model of marketing but in a way in which the net grows to the percentage of the whole it deserves. If you keep mass marketing of image and web marketing of responsibitity and human causes separate ; of course the net will never get a look in for 2 reasons. The mass starts with 100% of the budget. The economics of global marketing would be as profitably bust at start up if you seperated the net from the mass as it is socially deprivational keeping the mass separated from the web.

I'm finding myself torn by Chris and John's messages.

I view the targeting idea purely as a political/practical idea. What would work better, generalizing or particularizing? I see merit in targeting a few industries initially as a way of making them feel the pressure faster and as a way of gaining notice quickly, I also like the idea of having a general program for allowing *any* company that does the good deed to place a sticker on their ads saying that they have done so.

But from Chris' latest message, I think he may be aiming at something that I didn't glom on to earlier (which is my fault). Chris, do you view the signers of the pledge as as continuing political force, organized in a center-less webby way? I haven't been viewing them that way but rather as a mass of people who influences behavior by sheer numbers.

Now, I'm torn by those two possibilities also because signing a pledge is a lot easier than joining a semi-political group.

FWIW, at the moment I'd lean towards: Announcing the campaign as a general one but also announcing that we're focusing on 2 industries first. And I'd prefer *anything* that makes it easier for the campaign to succeed in the short term on the grounds that long term change can grow from the short term success. But I am not confident in my beliefs about either of these points.

Edited by author 09-01-2002 10:03 AM
Guided Tour : How The Web We'll Win
W:: W :: W

The Million People Web 2002 emerging from http://www.valuetrue.com/home/glossary.cfm


I am sorry John but as I see it you are wording things wrongly - the pledge of The Million People Web is not a generalised attack. It is both a very personal question and an aspiration to change the whole system of how all large organisations collaborate, in resolving the world's biggest needs, in ways that a networking age can do but broadcasting could not.

At a personal level, this extends down to whichever global brand is the biggest celebrity in the eyes of you or you or you. And then to ask me or me or me, did I really want this company to have such a celebrity perception in my mind because it spent 250 million dollars each year advertising that at me? Might I not have felt warmed more as a responsible person if it spent 90% on its celebrity status and 10% on starting collaborations that were focused on making the world a better place in ways I could have played a part and united more and more people, companies, governments, activists, people at the grassroots in one webbed effort? We are all united by the same global brandscape whichever one happens to be that which has spent the most to be in your mind.

Equally, I would have no way of justifying why we chose one company to single out. The nature of the most desperate problems is beyond the resolution of any single company; that is why we must pledge for and to all global companies and the evolution of the system they all use to make us feel good about them and ourselves.

I would like to remind you of the introduction of what the web is for according to Weinberger, because it is the relevant context for framing The Million People Web (2002):

 What is the Web for? And why do we care so much? Why has this simple technology sent a lightning bolt through our culture? It goes far beyond the Web's over-hyped economic impact: 500 million of us aren't there because we want a better "shopping experience." The Web, a world of pure connection, free of the arbitrary constraints of matter, distance and time, is showing us who we are - and is undoing some of our deepest misunderstandings about what it means to be human in the real world.

The context I have in mind is a global world which is now opinion led at the top by a league of 100 economic greatest powers of which:
51 are global corporates whose only conversationwith us is about their granhd images

49 who are governments who are mainly inward looking (except when they are hostile) and whose leaders (if we were to look around at the average Clinton or Bush) carry their own flags a long way ahead of sustainable (long-term) global responsibilities.

The idea of The Million People Web was intentionally aimed in the collaborative midst of thse 100 superpowers and how we could all actively web around them with global and local networks. If you have a plot with another mission by all means go detail what the first starting step is for that but please don't dilute the idea The Million People Web is constituted for in these times when the muddles going on in the world terrify me, and I would like all global corporates to have an additional response to lets sing some more ad jingles, each propagated by hundreds of millions of dollars of campaign tunes. The time has come to catalyse a second way of promoting what matters most in the world, and 10% towards that along with 90% sing-song seems like a democratic way to ask for the networked world to see what new human energies we can inspire.

Now if someone has another vision of how poor world gaps are going to be narrowed other than by the mother of all collaboration systems sponsored by organisations and empowered by people who network and have deep humanitarian care -example concept EU Water Angels at http://www.knowledgeboard.com/cgi-bin/item...format=%o%20%B%20%Y then please share your vision...

Thanks, David, for setting up this discussion space.

I still want to argue for tighter focus. I personally don't have a lot of faith in the power of a generalised attack on a group of companies. I don't think it will capture popular imagination and I don't think it will work.

Systemically, I think we should try and identify one point of maximum leverage. Or at least high leverage since we may not be able to be sure what maximum would be.

People respond to brands and I seem them respond to campaigns that target specific brands.. Shell, Esso and Nike all come to mind.

I think they will respond to a specific idea expressed in threepenny words - like tackling third world water problems. A generalised aim of tackling lots of issues is - I think - less likely to capture imagination.

Just imagine if we target one company and apply the force of a million people pledge. It will feel lonely and it will want to shift. Think of the publicity impact if it does. And then there is nothing to stop us mailing pledgees and announcing a new pledge site for a new company and a cause.

I think David's suggestion of identifying a sector is an interesting variation and preferable to just saying all these companies. Or maybe we go Chris's route but identify just the three biggest spenders - even though I personally would just go for one.

Edited by author 10-01-2004 09:26 PM
The Million People Web 2002 emerging from http://www.valuetrue.com/home/glossary.cfm

I look forward to developing a site that can do justice to this movement which has spread to most continents within first 72 hours of gestation. My trouble is I can't keep up with registrations by hand. The reference number we are using for the project challenge of million people pledging is KM15/30K (the 15th of 30000 active projects for humanity we hope one day to compile as the greatest use of the net- a forecast for a networked world's priorities (to be do-able by and essential for global hamrony by 2005) made by my father in 1984 when at The Economist.

More on the issue raised as to whether the primary mission is framed as boycott (we will consume less with you unless you are responsible) or encouragement (we will consume more with you if you prove responsibility)

On reflection I strongly retain the view that the simplest public pledge (to viralise) should be "we'll try to consume less of you"

This does not prevent us from trying to develop positive forms of engagement with corporates. For example, I could imagine this sort of approach. If we get over 500,000 people, we start preparing our list of global companies who qualify for exclusion. We write to their CEOs inviting them to send a delegate to a conference which discusses the whys and provides emergent social models of experiments people are trying out. I can imagine that properly handled this could be a conference which would lead Responsibility as a competitive advantage into new areas of excellence and advocacy, as well as distinguishing those companies who at least tried to listen to the conversation to those who were careless. This fits part of a pattern of lots of other research going on around our Transparency Community at http://www.valuetrue.com and which for example I have spent most of the last 2 years researching and networing into an open source community which seeks to link with everyone who wishes to turn the tide on the low-water market that corporate accountability has reached in recent times and that all institutions (global corporate. government, NGOs ) have reached assuming we all agree that as of today Poor World Gaps are greater than ever and tearing us all apart form the ideal of a one networked world whose sand-glass of opportunity is emptying terrifyingly fast imo

If we could set up a worldwide patrons panel, who would be your ideal people? For me the centre of my admiration as a Responsibility strategist is Don Tapscott http://www.digital4sight.com/lne.php ; for an activist who wants to see big business climb back from Enronesque hells Marjorie Kelly is central to my way of thinking http://www.business-ethics.com/thenext.htm

It would be interesting to represent opposite sides of the world - who are the equivalent people who spend all of their time on these issues near you?

Edited by author 09-01-2002 09:35 AM
John Moore asked whether we shouldn't target sectors rather than all global companies.

I think from the point of view of what we are asking consumers to sign up for it should be all global corporates over a certain size who don't have sufficient responsibility communications budgets (as proxy for commitment, focus , deep concern they have for a humanitsarian issue they share and network around te globe) . It gets too complicated to start getting consumer petitions by sector , nor is my disgust with any one sector, it is with the big guys eg the 51 globals who together make up the top league of 100 economic superpowers of whuch the other 49 are nations. I was trying to design a catalytic mechanism which would start shifting the mindset of the global brander from:
all mass media to involving people in intelligent use of net

and from all image to getting involved with a real world responsibility

from we as a company are a separate target to we as a global leader need to form collaborations with governments , NGOs, activists networks, and even some of our industry competitors to resolve this desperate human need (people who compete on a product should not be competitors on an environmental risk or deseperat cause, except in as far as one takes the lead for the whole lot to collaborate on)

250 million dollars ad per year was a rough guess at where this top 100 (ie 51 corporate) cut-off is though I wouldnt be surprised if someone come back with the numbers and says the top 51 mainly spend over 500 million dollars

You could always remind consumers who pledged to make special targets by sector in calendar waves or whatever, but I think sector identification for the overall thing is a needless complication to the simplicity of the 1 Million People Web 2002

Please note the generality of the pledge is a different issue from providing links to people who are working on particular global responsibilty infrastructures and how these should match by indutsry. For example regarding water for the poor world, we have the EU Water Angels initiative at http://www.knowledgeboard.com/cgi-bin/item...format=%o%20%B%20%Y

This is a place to discuss Chris Macrae's Million Person Web idea.

To receive automatic email notifications of when posts are made here -- to which you can reply via email -- click on the "subscribe" button in the upper left hand corner of this page.