Sean Howard catches a good example of questionable thinking about participation. The International Associaton for Public Participation has put out a one pager (pdf) with a remarkably top down notion of getting bottom up involvement.

The language is very telling:

We will keep you informed... we will look to you for advice... we will implement what you decide

This is why I think bottom-up is not the same as peer-to-peer. Bottom-up seems to embody the same underlying logic as top down, whilst peer-to-peer points to something rather more interesting, complex and challenging.