* The Center for Internet Research was formed to help shape the new
discipline of "Internet" and "Netspace" studies. It is based in
collaborative technologies therefore allowing "distance" based associations
and projects. Those that disparage this raise false arguments and are not
leveraging the capabilities of the Internet in their thinking.
* We have no commercial agenda or purpose.
* To that end, we support the any and all activities that embrace the
level of scholarship required. This includes organizations such as AOIR, Web
Science, IxDa, IAI, SciP, ACM, EFF, NACOL, Monterey Institute, and IEEE to
mention only a few.
* We embrace "open access" to scholarly works and will endeavor to
* We challenge the elitism of "peer review", the inherent social
control, and stratification it fosters. We are open to suggestions for an
* We believe that the "Internet" and "Netspace" are separable but
reflexive and for the purpose of scholarship must be operationally defined.
* We believe that Internet scholarship should embrace the full
spectrum digital technologies that assist communications. To do otherwise
reflects a deeper misunderstanding or ignorance of the subjects themselves.
* We believe that rigorous Internet and Netspace scholarship is
occurring in both academic and non-academic domains and that "authority" is
not the privilege of either.
* We believe that in the spirit of cross-disciplinary communications
it is basic to develop the appropriate cognitive frameworks to support the
various disciplinarities and level of collaboration.
* We believe that in defining the application of the various
disciplinarities and perspectives it is essential to explicitly define the
levels of collaboration and cross methodologies.
* We believe that rules of discourse should be explicitly defined and
not subject to social custom or tacit understanding.
* We believe scientific communications should not be closed to dispute
and public examination of those disputes.
* We believe in attacking the message not the messenger.
* We believe that all attempts to communicate should not be
academically dense and pretentious. This will enable the body of
stakeholders to be received as credible, understandable, and accountable.
* We should make all attempts possible to embrace the deep learning of
the various disciplinarities, while at the same time encouraging them to
seek a broader base of scientific solutions and schema.
* We believe that defense of the status quo reflects the defender more
than the challenger.
* We believe that disciplinarities investigating in parallel does
nothing to lead towards establishing a unique field of investigation.
* We believe that all methodologies should be scholarly and rigorous,
be they quantitative or qualitative.
* We believe in trans-disciplinarity as an "ideal" of true
These beliefs are supported by:
"The Production Of Knowledge" by Gibbons et al
"Disciplinary differences and University Teaching" by Ruth Neumann
"Multidisciplinary Working Group" by Martin Schoonen
"Cross Talking" by Jeanette D. Hoit
"Hypercomplexity and Digital Media Studies" by Jeff Rutenbeck
"The Hypercomplex Society" by Lars Qvortrup