Tag: indymedia

Projects that need to work to help #reboot the #openweb

The #OGB is important to develop better ways of having “trust” based conversations and “trust” based “governance” in the #openweb. It is built on years of on-the-ground organizing and emphasizes the need for voluntary cooperation and collaboration. The project recognizes the problems in alternative tech, starting with the #4opens to remove complexity to building governance structures that are native to the #fediverse. The #OGB address the limitations of #mainstreaming approaches.

The #indymediaback project is a reboot of the original #Indymedia project, which was a decentralized, grassroots media network that emerged in the late 1990s and early 2000s. The project aims to learn from the mistakes and challenges faced by the original Indymedia, particularly the split between the #fashernitas and #geekproblem factions.

The focus of the #indymediaback reboot is to return to the path of the #fashernitas, which emphasizes open media and decentralized structures, rather than control and centralization. The project aims to build an open media network (#OMN) that promotes direct democracy, open publishing, and anti-authoritarianism.

The reboot also acknowledges the risk of another split within the community, particularly if some members push for a control/encryptionist path. The challenge is to find a way to navigate this without succumbing to tribalism and power politics.

The #indymediaback project recognizes the importance of hashtags and semantic web technologies, which were not core to the original Indymedia project. Tags and metadata are being used to help organize and categorize content.

Overall, the #indymediaback project aims to revive the spirit of open media and grassroots activism, while learning from past mistakes and embracing new technologies and approaches.

The #OMN (Open Media Network), is a decentralized network of media sites that share content and promote independent media. It aims to provide an alternative to mainstream media by creating a network of interconnected sites that prioritize openness, collaboration, and decentralization.

The #OMN project emphasizes the importance of grassroots community-driven media, where people and groups can create and share their own content. It seeks to challenge the dominance of #mainstreaming media and promote a more equitable and just society.

The project has been running for over ten years and operates with an #openprocess. Users can become mods after being involved for a certain period of time. The modding process is based on a clear project statement and encourages a respectful and inclusive community.

The #OMN project is closely related to the #visionontv project, which is a grassroots media project that creates and distributes independent video content. The two projects share similar values and goals in promoting alternative media and challenging mainstream narratives.

The #IndymediaBack project is an initiative aimed at reviving the #Indymedia project

The #IndymediaBack project is an initiative aimed at reviving the #Indymedia project, a decentralized grassroots media network that emerged in the late 1990s and early 2000s. The project was founded on the principles of open publishing, direct democracy, and anti-authoritarianism. This very powerful project was ripped apart from internal and external tensions and forces. The #IndymediaBack project aims to reboot the project before the split happened, around 2008, with a focus on the #fashernitas path of the splinter groups. This path emphasizes #openmedia and decentralized structures, rather than control and centralization. The project aims to learn from the mistakes of the past and avoid the same tribalism and power politics that led to the decline of the original project. The project is based on the principles of openness, collaboration, and decentralization, and aims to provide an alternative to mainstream media by creating and distributing independent media content.

A draft funding application – OGB

Requesting funding for the Open Governance Body (#OGB) project, which is being developed by the Open Media Network (#OMN). OMN is a collective that builds and hosts #4opens standards-based socio-political software. Our mission is to provide communities with the tools they need to organize, communicate, and make decisions.

The #OGB project is a grassroots initiative that seeks to empower communities by giving them a stronger voice in decision-making. We believe that traditional social coding projects that are based on a top-down approach to power are not effective. Our approach is different. We are developing a bottom-up solution that is based on the principles of sharing power and collective decision-making.

Our team has years of experience in grassroots social tech projects. We have been directly involved with #UnderCurrents, #indymedia, #VisionOnTV, #LondonBoating, among others, and have a firm grasp of what does and does not work within organizing both social and technological communities. We have also worked on UN and World Bank projects in West Africa and have decided to manage them through community/scrum, rather than formal methods.

We are seeking funding in the amount of $50,000. This funding will be used to pay four people to work on the project at a fixed rate of ten thousand euros for 9-12 months of work. The bulk of the work will be programming and implementation details. The remaining ten thousand will be used for servers, expenses, outreach work, extensive testing, and basic project upkeep.

A Look at Existing Projects

It is important to note that foundation funding agendas can have a negative effect on the agendas of #openweb projects. A brief look at some existing projects highlights this issue. For example, decidim.org, which is an NGO process similar to loomio.org, Formal processes can be a bad tool for “herding cats” in social challenge or activist groups. And has been imposed numerous times in activism but has always failed.

After reviewing loomio.org, it is clear that the same ideas and workflows were pushed onto #climatecamp, #indymedia, and #occupy. In the first two cases, it ossified the projects, and in the last case, it was a mess. The #processgeeks behind these projects have not changed, and their projects are a bad fit for life and a terrible fit for the fediverse and activism. However, they may work for some NGOs and more formal cooperative organizing.

It is important to note the differences between formal and informal governance structures. Both use “consensus,” but the Open Governance Body is more like a do-ocracy than a formal governance structure.

 

My indymedia story

This is a DRAFT

Indymedia was a decentralized, grassroots media network that emerged in the late 1990s and early 2000s. It was founded on the principles of open publishing, direct democracy, and anti-authoritarianism. The project eventually experienced a split in the UK, with one side, the #fashernitas building an aggregating site and the other #geekproblem building a centralized silo. The split was supericaly over technical disagreements, but was driven by doctrinal and tribal disputes. The decision-making process, which relied on #formalconsensus, had become ossified and unfixable, so no decisions could be make any more to mediate this.

The split was ultimately driven by a focus on control on both sides. The two sides were more interested in their own tribal agendas than in working together to build a diverse and #4opens #OMN. The silo eventually built an aggregating site, with RSS feeds, but in a very controlling way. The stress was always on control, and this ultimately led to the decline of the #Indymedia project. The #dotcons took over the space, and the project became irrelevant.

I was working on the project, the person working in the middle saying “don’t be a prat” as each side tore and tore and tore I continued in the grassroots, saying that the culture is the key and that the value is in open media network, not control. The split in Indymedia was a shit show, but we can learn from it in the reboot.

The plan now is to reboot the project before the split happened, around 2008 with a focus on the #fashernitas path of the splinter groups. This path emphasizes openmedia and decentralized structures, rather than control and centralization. However, with the reboot there is still a very real risk that some members of the community will push for a control/encryptionist path, which could lead to another split in focus. The challenge is to find a way to walk this path without succumbing to the same tribalism and and power politics that led to the decline of the original project.

The use of hashtags and semantic web technologies did not exist at the time. Tags and metadata were not core to the start original Indymedia project, but they were later being added as a way to help organize and categorize content, the idea of building a structure with #RSS feeds was being discussed and enacted.

At the time, Interestingly, the silo path recognized that their approach was wrong and came back to aggregation, with moderated control of RSS flows. This is reflected in the #OMN’s choice of “trusted flow” and “moderated flow.” We are building both sides of the split of the original project and yes, criticizing the fashernista path a little, which only had trust, which would not likely work at all in today’s world. It’s important we do not make this decision for people. We let them decide and build both. The key is to avoid building pointless messes and to resist the #mainstreaming urge to make a mess. We are not mainstreaming, and we must not be prats about this.

Looking at what happened to the web after this time, the last ten years of tech history, the grassroots silo path went on to build #Diaspora, while the grassroots #fashernista path went on to build the #Fediverse. However, despite these developments, there was still no news based open media network being built yet. This led to the creation of the #OMN and the current #indymediaback reboot.

Unfortunately, in today’s world of liberation “cats” due to the last 20 years of the #deathcult, nobody sees any value in the “open” part of the #OMN. Everyone is still fixated on the silo path of control, we have to work against this #mainstreaming blindness. Over the last 20 years, the #mainstreaming as a whole took the silo/encryptionst path of the Indymedia split. Contemporary social media took #fahernista side of the #open path, the #dotcons, took the ideas and sold us back a facsimile of this that they could control, such as Facebook and other algorithms base #dotcons

To make the reboot work best, we have to tiptoe around the legacy of #Indymedia, focus on rebooting the project ain its 2008 state, where the social process were still working. The silos’ path control the old domains as they took as a part of the ripping. We are building something that looks like the fashernista path they fought against, so we need to build two projects in one: control and trust. We need to get the domains back in use, which would be a huge boost to the #reboot project. At the same time, we need to build trust with everyone else, as this is the power of open. It’s complicated, but everyone wants it back. However, the history is challenging, and the two sides are still fighting: fedivers vs. silos as we see this old mess today.

Why do people keep doing pointless self harm – news aggreation

There are hundreds (over the last 20 years likely thousands) of news, aggregation sites. It’s a common #dotcons model to inclose the “commons” people see free content and think I can capture that. The problem is news content looks like it’s free, but that’s because it’s “free” to spread, but it’s VERY expensive in human (and thus money) to produce the content. This side is never addressed in these failed projects.

We currently have #traditionalmedia all round the world pushing to be paid for aggregation and even search of their “product”. At #OMN and #indymediaback, we get round these issues as we add “value” by the #DIY labour of the meany people involved in the shared “commons” space. We are producing rather than “stealing” in the #mainstreaming view.

It’s normal that the top-down news aggregators are seen as parasites, and the bootm up aggregators as adding value. For a few years of #indymedia growth, #traditionalmedia was using #indymedia as a “news” source, this shaped the #mainstreaming agenda, adding value to both paths.

When the #openweb we were building was ripped apart by internal and external pressers and agenders, the #DIY value was captured by the #dotcons such as #Facebook and later #twitter (when it left it’s open’ish path).

The first step away from the current mess is to recreate the “commons” to bring the value back from the #dotcons capture, this should be more possible now as we are building from the #Fediverse where this has already happened. What we do with this recreated “commons” is up to meany different groups/people, but let’s hold the #4opens and #PGA strongly in place to stop “common sense” enclosing attempts, which are constant pointless damage we need to work around.

To sum up, a key part of the #OMN is to recreate the data “commons” then it’s up to meany other groups to find useful things to do with this free to use non-commercial value. And yes lots of people will see the stupid path of enclosing this to capture the value for themselves, this is damage.

In capitalism, any non-owned value is seen as an opportunity to capture, enclosed and profit from. This is why we have copyleft licences in code, which is visibly failing and why we extend this to the #4opens to fail less 😉

This all comes down to the question of what we value. And for meany people, this is a blindness.

The Genoa #G8 Summit protest

The Genoa #G8 Summit protest, which took place from July 18 to July 22, 2001, was a significant event in the history of modern protest movements. The protest drew an estimated 200,000 demonstrators from all over the world, who came together to block the event and voice their concerns about the power and influence of the #deathcult in the G8 countries.

The G8 Summit, which brings together the world’s eight most powerful countries, is a controversial event that has long been the target of protest movements. Critics of the G8 argue that it is an undemocratic institution that seeks to set the rules for the world at large, without real accountability to the people it purports to serve.

The protesters who gathered in Genoa were determined to block the event and make their voices heard, and they were met with an extremely violent and heavy-handed response from the Italian police. Dozens of protesters were hospitalized, more were taken into custody after night raids on two schools housing sleeping #NGO activists and #indymedia journalists.

The treatment of those who were taken into custody was barbaric. Protesters were beaten, sexually assaulted, and denied access to medical treatment. Many of those who were held in custody were subjected to psychological torture, including sleep deprivation and solitary confinement. Despite the brutality of the police response, the protesters remained resolute, Seeing the G8 Summit as a symbol of everything that is wrong with the world.

The Italian government was later brought to trial in the European Court of Human Rights, where it was found guilty of violating the human rights. The court ruled that the police response to the protest was excessive.

The carnival was a reminder that resistance is possible

The Carnival Against Capital was a global day of protest that took place on Friday, June 18th, 1999. It was a response to the 25th G8 Summit, which was being held in Cologne, Germany at the time. The carnival was organized as an international day of action to protest against the capitalist system and the role of the G8 in maintaining it. The event was also known as #J18, and it was inspired by previous protests such as the Stop the City protests in the 1980s, Peoples’ Global Action (#PGA), and the Global Street Party (#RTS)

The main rallying cry for the Carnival Against Capital was “Our Resistance is as Transnational as Capital.” This was a call to action for people around the world to come together and resist the global capitalist system. The event was organized by a loose coalition of groups and organizations who shared a common goal of fighting against capitalism and its impact on people’s lives.

In London, a spoof newspaper was produced to promote the event, alongside other publicity. On the day itself, the carnival started with a Critical Mass bike ride, which saw cyclists taking to the streets to highlight the problems of car culture and promote alternative forms of transport. This was followed by an action by the Campaign Against Arms Trade, which aimed to draw attention to the role of the arms trade in perpetuating war and conflict.

Later in the day, a large march converged on the London International Financial Futures Exchange for a street party. The exchange was chosen as a symbolic target because it represented the heart of the global financial system. The street party was a festive and creative event, featuring music, dancing, and street theatre. It was also an opportunity for people to express their anger and frustration at the system that was causing them harm.

The Carnival Against Capital was not just limited to London. There were protests in over 40 cities around the world, including Barcelona, Montevideo, Port Harcourt, and San Francisco. Using then new technology, the protests were reported on the internet by independent media activists from London and Sydney, in a step towards the #Indymedia network. This was a significant development in the history of protest movements, as it allowed activists to bypass the mainstream media and communicate directly with each other and the wider public.

The legacy of the Carnival Against Capital lives on today. It was a powerful moment in the history of the anti-globalization movement and showed that ordinary people could come together to challenge the #mainstreaming globalist thinking. The event inspired many people to become involved in activism and to work towards a fairer and more just world. The carnival was a reminder that resistance is possible, and that another world is not only desirable but also achievable.

Talking about grassroots media as a step away from the current #techshit

Hamish Campbell, a veteran in radical media for the past 30 years, discusses the failure of current technology and mainstream culture. He highlights how the #dotcon boom commodified our data, resulting in closed technology silos like #Facebook and #Instagram that capture our attention and data for their own profit. Campbell argues that alternative technology built around an #encryptionist agenda has gone nowhere and that the world is dominated by these tech giants. He argues for the importance of the #openweb, which was born open but is dying closed over the last 20 years, and advocates for rebooting grassroots media as a solution. Campbell uses the Oxford #IMC as an example of how a simple federated network can work by sharing content, using trusted link flows, and allowing content to be moderated or rolled back. He believes that the beauty of the #openweb is based on free flowing links, unlike the #closedweb of our current dominating technology. Campbell concludes that the #OMN project is more important for what it does not do than for what it does, and highlights the need to take small steps towards a solution by rebooting grassroots media as a example project.

What you can do

In the last few years there have been events and gatherings in the US, Portugal, and Madrid, discussing the possibility of #rebooting #Indymedia. The current history of Indymedia has been primarily written by academics and is very Americanized, so there is a need to retell the stories and provide a wider perspective. To successfully reboot Indymedia, I think it needs to return to its open and serendipitous roots, rather than the bureaucratic and closed structure it became. Fortunately, most of the technical tools needed for a decentralized and federated system, such as ActivityPub and Scuttlebutt, already exist. To maintain its radical grassroots philosophy, the #4opens principles should be used to ensure openness and accessibility. To get involved, one can search for #indymediaback or “reboot Indymedia” and find useful links #OMN

We used to have heathy alt culture

#Indymedia was a global network of independently-operated media outlets that provide an alternative to #mainstreaming media and promote participatory and decentralized journalism. The network was founded in 1999 to cover events and provide a platform for activists, community groups and journalists to share their perspectives and experiences.

#Indymedia consisted of hundreds of websites and local collectives, each with their own focus and editorial policies, but all sharing radical #4opens and PGA hall marks working.

Over the years, the Indymedia network faced challenges, including censorship, legal pressure, and technical issues, but it remained an important and influential platform for independent media until its decline in the late 2000s and early 2010s.

A news project for the fediverse

#Indymedia is a decentralized network of independent media outlets that aims to provide a platform for grassroots and alternative perspectives on news and current events. It operates on a decentralized model, with each local or regional outlet being run by an editorial collective who are responsible for moderating content and coordinating with other outlets in the network.

The newswire on each site is open to submissions from citizen journalists and focuses on providing context-rich, on-the-ground reporting. The feature column is written by the editorial collective, who select stories from the newswire and provide additional analysis or commentary.

The network also coordinates with other progressive, #PGA and #4opens projects within the #fediverse. The goal of #Indymedia is to provide a platform for alternative and marginalized voices and to promote decentralized, autonomous organizing and media production.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txCLtKpDwNE

#indymediaback