We can compost the barriers to building shared social truths

With the fragmentation of truth in the “post-truth world” we need to nurture social truths and build useful paths for collective understanding:

  1. Build trusted frameworks for information by promote fact-checking and transparency. Encourage platforms and networks to integrate transparent mechanisms for verifying claims (e.g., open fact-checking databases with linked sources). This builds credibility and promotes critical thinking. Create public knowledge hubs like Wikipedia as examples of crowdsourced truth. Amplify and protect such spaces to ensure they remain accessible. Support grassroots independent media by championing smaller, decentralized media networks (like #OMN) that prioritize transparency, ethics, and local reporting counteracting monopolized narratives.
  2. Reinvigorate the commons shared networks for dialogue by creating spaces (both online and offline) where diverse perspectives can engage in structured, mediated discussions. Encourage participatory governance (like the #OGB) of digital communities to nurture shared norms around truth and actions. Open hashtag networks can help, use hashtags to aggregate diverse perspectives under common topics, encouraging tagging flows that emphasize collaboration over conflict.
  3. Human-centric storytelling can help, use narratives to illustrate the human cost of disinformation and the value of truth.
  4. Encourage peer-moderated content and support networks where trust grows organically through consistent, verified contributions (e.g., OMN’s tagging model). Human relationships first before diving into debates—trust grows when people feel heard, not combative. Highlight smaller community efforts to reach agreements on shared realities, which can then scale regionally and globally.
  5. Grow a culture of open inquiry to embrace complexity, not all questions have simple answers—it’s okay to live with uncertainty while seeking truth. Balance humility, with a mindset of curiosity and openness to change one’s mind when confronted with new evidence. Public challenges with collective projects (crowdsourced investigations and open debates) to involve diverse voices and establish transparency in seeking truth.
  6. Develop social tools that bring attention to high-consensus content to balance polarizing materials. Tagging paths can build social consensus, use hashtags to organize content. The messy semantic web tools like the #OMN can foster collaborative environments where context and trust are added into content flows.

Addressing the Chicken-and-Egg Problem, to overcome the challenge of needing a critical mass to build momentum (e.g., hashtags gaining traction only when widely used). Start small by beginning with focused communities that share a commitment to truth and scales organically. Use catalysts, leverage influential advocates and events to draw attention to the importance of shared truths. Incentivize participation with recognition, visibility, and other motivators for contributions to truth-oriented networks. On this path, by growing the emphasis on collaboration, openness, and trust, we can compost the barriers to building shared social truths. What do you think?

Let’s look from a fresh view at the mess we need to fix

Socialism versus Liberalism, let’s look at the differences between two world-views that claim freedom and equality but define them in radically different ways. This isn’t just theory; it’s a look at how liberalism masks inequality with lofty slogans, while socialism might dismantle the structures enabling exploitation.

Socialism focuses on six key areas:

Freedom: Liberal freedom is individual but hollow, constrained by economic necessity. Marxist freedom is collective and material.
Democracy: Liberal democracy serves the wealthy, while proletarian democracy serves the working class.
Property: Liberalism protects private property as sacred, whereas Marxism challenges ownership of productive resources.
The State: The liberal state claims neutrality but serves capital. The Marxist state dismantles class power.
Human Nature: Liberalism naturalizes greed, while Marxism sees behavior as shaped by material conditions.
The Stakes: This isn’t just an academic debate but a struggle over the future of society.

In this breakdown, socialism critiques liberalism and offers an alternative rooted in material analysis and collective action.

Freedom – Liberalism claims that freedom means individual rights, equality before the law, and the ability to pursue success. But socialists point out that under capitalism, this freedom is formal, not real. Workers may be free to sell their labour to any employer, but they’re still forced to work to survive. Meanwhile, the capitalist—factory owner, landlord, boss—has the freedom to exploit labour, accumulate wealth, and protect their power.

This isn’t equality. It’s a system where one class’s freedom depends on another’s exploitation. For every self-made millionaire, countless workers remain trapped in poverty.

Socialism rejects this abstract view of freedom. Instead of focusing on rights in theory, it looks at material conditions—how power, property, and survival are distributed in society. True freedom can only exist when the means of production (factories, land, resources) are collectively owned and democratically managed.

Democracy – Liberal democracy is often celebrated, but socialism challenges its legitimacy. On paper, liberal democracy means rule by the people. In practice, economic power shapes political power. The wealthy fund campaigns, own media, and lobby politicians. Workers may cast votes, but the ruling class sets the agenda.

Socialism redefines democracy, it’s about direct participation through workers’ councils and collective decision-making. Proletarian democracy means the working class rules and shapes the world around them every day.

Property – Liberalism treats private property as sacred, but socialism notes this refers to the means of production, not personal belongings. Under capitalism, a minority owns productive forces, while the majority must sell their labour to survive. This isn’t about freedom—it’s about maintaining class domination.

Socialism advocates for collective ownership of the means of production, ensuring workplaces are democratically managed. Private property under liberalism protects the wealth of the few, while socialism serves the needs of the many.

The State – Liberalism portrays the state as neutral, a referee ensuring fairness. Socialism calls this a myth. In reality, the liberal state is a class weapon protecting the capitalist ruling class. Laws, police, and institutions safeguard private property and suppress dissent.

Under socialism, state power serves the working class, dismantling remnants of capitalism and empowering collective ownership. Over time, class distinctions fade, and the state itself withers away.

Human Nature -Liberalism argues that capitalism aligns with human nature, claiming people are naturally greedy and competitive. Socialism counters that human behaviour is shaped by social and economic conditions. In a system built on exploitation, greed is rewarded. In a cooperative system, solidarity and collective well-being flourish.

The Stakes – This isn’t just an academic debate; it’s a battle for society’s future. Liberalism defends inequality with abstract freedoms, while socialism seeks to abolish class divisions and create a world where freedom is a material reality.

For socialists, the choice is clear: remain locked in cycles of exploitation under liberal capitalism, or move toward collective liberation.

It’s worth thinking about this.


From socialism, we could step to communism: What is Communism?

Communism is a doctrine of the conditions needed to liberate the working class, known as the proletariat. The proletariat comprises workers who sell their labour to survive because they don’t own any means of production. Communism focuses on transforming society so the working class—those who produce the wealth—can escape exploitation and take control.

A key aspect of this liberation involves abolishing private property. However, this doesn’t mean all property—it specifically targets bourgeois property, such as factories, land, and resources owned by the capitalist class. This form of ownership enables inequality, as the wealth workers produce is taken as profit by the owners.

The historical context of class struggle – we need to frame communism within the broader history of class struggle, that history is shaped by the conflicts between social classes—masters and slaves, lords and serfs, capitalists and workers. Each era of human history is defined by these struggles, and capitalism has intensified them.

Under capitalism, industry concentrates wealth and power in the hands of a few while leaving the majority—the proletariat—in increasingly precarious conditions. This system creates the very conditions that make revolutionary change possible.

The Goals of Communism

Abolition of Private Property - Socialism clarifies that this doesn’t mean taking personal items like clothing or homes but refers to ending private ownership of productive resources like factories and machinery. These are the tools that allow exploitation, and ending such ownership ensures collective benefit rather than private gain.

Elimination of Class Distinctions - Class divisions arise from unequal ownership of property. When resources are collectively owned, the basis for social classes disappears. This would allow individuals to contribute based on their abilities and receive according to their needs, fostering equality and mutual respect.

Universal Equality - Beyond economic equality, communism seeks to end social and political oppression. Capitalism concentrates wealth and power, perpetuating systemic injustice. True equality involves restructuring society to guarantee access to education, healthcare, and opportunities for all.

But how can communism be achieved? – The transition to communism on the normal path requires revolutionary change. The working class seize political power and establish a new form of governance that represents the majority. This revolution must be international, reflecting the global nature of capitalism.

Some of the practical steps for the proletarian government, including abolishing inheritance rights, centralizing banking under public control, ensuring free education, and merging agriculture with industry to bridge urban-rural divides. These steps aim to dismantle capitalist exploitation and lay the foundation for an equitable society.

A classless and stateless society – The goal of communism is a society without classes or a state. Class distinctions exist because one class controls wealth and resources, and the state enforces this dominance. By abolishing private property and redistributing resources, the basis for class distinctions disappears.

In this future society, the state, as a tool of coercion, becomes unnecessary. Instead, governance shifts to collective management of resources and services through democratic participation. The focus is on cooperation, where individuals contribute according to their abilities and receive according to their needs.

Why is communism important? – Communism as the liberation of the working class, the historical context of class struggle, and the goals and methods of the movement. By eliminating exploitation and fostering collective well-being, these ideas remain relevant today.

What do you think?


What does Karl Marx think about this? – That we need to understand the mechanics of capitalist societies:

Historical Materialism – Marx shows how material conditions (like economic systems) shape society’s structure. He argues that the economy—tools, labor, and production relationships—determines the legal, political, and cultural systems. He also critiques idealists (like Hegel) who claim ideas shape reality. Instead, Marx asserts that people’s material circumstances shape their consciousness. History, in his view, moves forward through class struggles, driven by conflicts between social classes with opposing interests.

The Commodity and Value Theory – Marx breaks down commodities into two aspects: Use-value: What the item is useful for. Exchange-value: What it’s worth in the market.

He argues that labour is the true source of a commodity’s value, challenging the idea that supply and demand determine worth. This leads to his concept of surplus value—the difference between what workers produce and what they’re paid. This is how capitalists profit, by exploiting workers.

Money and Circulation – Marx explains how money acts as a universal standard for exchange, simplifying trade but also enabling exploitation. Money becomes capital when it’s used to buy labour and production tools to generate profit (surplus value). This cycle of capital accumulation drives inequality and can lead to economic crises, like overproduction or market chaos.

Production and Exchange in Capitalism – Production is where human needs are met and wealth is created. In capitalism, the focus on profit leads to worker exploitation, poor conditions, and alienation from their work. Exchange—how goods are traded—creates competition and chaos in the market, often leading to economic crises. These contradictions show the instability of capitalism.

Historical Development – In a famous preface, Marx explains how society’s base (its economy) determines the superstructure (laws, politics, culture). Changes in the economic base drive changes in society, often through class struggles. He sees history as a series of conflicts between classes, where new systems replace old ones through revolution.

This is a starting point for understanding Marx’s critique of capitalism. These ideas set the stage, what do you think?

Open Media Network (OMN): An Overview

This is a reformatted and updated text from 8 years ago:

The Open Media Network (#OMN) is a reboot of the “indymedia” project, reimagined as an open, decentralized network for sharing and aggregating content across websites. Guided by the principles of the and motivated by the PGA hallmarks, OMN creates a people-to-people trust-based tagging system for collaboration and ethical aggregation.

What Are OMN Nodes?

OMN nodes are the backbone of the network. These nodes perform specific functions to enable the sharing and dissemination of content within the OMN ecosystem:

Hosting Content Flows: Nodes curate and host flows of content based on tags from other OMN sites on subjects that interest them.

Content is imported via RSS from external sites and by #ActivityPub from #Fediverse and OMN sites.

Tagging and Retagging: Nodes can tag and retag objects within content flows to direct them to other nodes or to specific sections, such as sidebars/pages on websites.

Providing Tagged Content: Nodes offer tagged content flows to other sites, which can embed the content using codes as needed.

Content Archiving (Optional): Nodes may choose to archive content locally.

The roles and functionality of nodes will evolve organically as the network develops.

Types of Sites in the OMN

OMN sites serve different purposes within the network:

Publishing Sites: The original sources of content. Typically, provide an #RSS feed of ActivityPub flow for the network.

Aggregating Sites: Focus on specific subjects, localities, or themes. Receive feeds from publishing sites and curate high-quality, trusted content for distribution to higher-level nodes.

News/Link Portals: Regional, national, or major subject sites. Aggregate trusted feeds from intermediate aggregating sites and select publishing sites.

The Human Element of OMN

The OMN emphasizes human moderation and relationship building:

Trust: Relationships between node administrators, content providers, and users form the foundation of the network.

Decentralization: Unlike traditional centralized models, OMN’s structure encourages openness and collaboration.

Ethical Aggregation: Content is networked respectfully to create a robust alternative to failing commercial platforms (#dotcons).

Key Features of Ethical Aggregation

Prominent display of OMN links on participating sites.

Links are live and direct users to the original host site for reading and commenting.

Original sources are credited under content titles.

Aggregation behaviour (e.g., full content in apps) is agreed upon by both parties, with opt-out options available.

Ad placements near Creative Commons non-commercial content require explicit agreement.

Building the Network

OMN leverages existing web standards to build an open “data soup” that enables many new possibilities:

Legacy Web Integration: Uses RSS for backward compatibility.

Semantic Web Transition: Moves towards a peer-to-peer semantic web with more p2p protocols.

User Stories: Articles published on one site can appear on many other sites, always linking back to the original source.

User Contributions

OMN encourages continuous improvement and collaboration:

Content remains open-ended to invite contributions and dialogue.

Tags and semantic data added by aggregators enhance the content flow for others.

Joining the OMN

Participation is voluntary and flexible:

Existing sites can continue operating independently while sharing content via RSS.

Posting can be done through personal blogs, group sites, or portals like #indymedia.

For “news” – A New Indymedia

Aggregating hubs/nodes in OMN represent the “new indymedia”:

These hubs may focus on subjects, countries, regions, or cities.

Unlike the centralizing elements of traditional networks, OMN’s open model reduces the need for centralized control.

Licensing and Openness

OMN adheres to open licensing principles:

Content is shared freely within the network.

Licensing ensures respect for contributors and promotes ethical usage.

Encouraging Collaboration

OMN thrives on contributions and engagement:

Leave questions or incomplete ideas to inspire participation.

Create linking overviews or summary articles that highlight stories within content flows.

Encourage human relationships to grow the trust-based network.

Conclusion

The Open Media Network (OMN) is an ambitious and open-ended project that refocuses decentralized media sharing for the modern web. By collaboration, trust, and ethical practices, OMN empowers participants to grow a sustainable and impactful alternative to the dieing corporate media platforms.


Open Media Network (OMN): A second view

What Are OMN Nodes?

OMN nodes are the backbone of the network. anyone can run one, the flows between them are based on trust. These nodes perform specific functions to enable the sharing and dissemination of content within the OMN ecosystem:

  1. Hosting Content Flows: Nodes curate and host flows of content based on tags from other OMN sites on subjects that interest them.
    • Content is imported via RSS from external sites and by activertypub from OMN sites.
  2. Tagging and Retagging: Nodes can tag and retag objects within content flows to direct them to other nodes or to specific sections, such as sidebars on websites.
  3. Providing Tagged Content: Nodes offer tagged content flows to other sites, which can embed the content using codes as needed.
  4. Content Archiving (Optional): Nodes may choose to archive content locally.

The roles and functionality of nodes will evolve organically as the network develops.

Types of Sites in the OMN

OMN sites serve different purposes within the network:

  1. Publishing Sites:
    • The original sources of content.
    • Typically provide an RSS feed for the network.
  2. Aggregating Sites:
    • Focus on specific subjects, localities, or themes.
    • Receive feeds from publishing sites and curate high-quality, trusted content for distribution to higher-level nodes.
  3. News/Link Portals:
    • Regional, national, or major subject sites.
    • Aggregate trusted feeds from intermediate aggregating sites and select publishing sites.

The Human Element of OMN

The OMN emphasizes human moderation and relationship building:

  • Trust: Relationships between node administrators, content providers, and users form the foundation of the network.
  • Decentralization: Unlike traditional centralized models, OMN’s structure encourages openness and collaboration.
  • Ethical Aggregation: Content is networked in a respectful way to create a robust alternative to failing commercial platforms (#dotcons).

Key Features of Ethical Aggregation

  • Prominent display of OMN links on participating sites.
  • Links are live and direct users to the original host site for reading and commenting.
  • Original sources are credited under content titles.
  • Aggregation behavior (e.g., full content in apps) is agreed upon by both parties, with opt-out options available.
  • Ad placements near Creative Commons non-commercial content require explicit agreement.

Building the Network

OMN leverages existing web standards to build an open “data soup” that enables many new possibilities:

  • Legacy Web Integration: Uses RSS for backward compatibility.
  • Semantic Web Transition: Moves towards a peer-to-peer semantic web with technologies like ActivityPub, Nostr, ATprotocol etc.
  • User Stories: Articles published on one site can appear on many other sites, always linking back to the original source.

User Contributions

OMN encourages continuous improvement and collaboration:

  • Content remains open-ended to invite contributions and dialogue.
  • Tags and semantic data added by aggregators enhance the content flow for others.

Joining the OMN

Participation is voluntary and flexible:

  • Existing sites can continue operating independently while sharing content via RSS.
  • Posting can be done through personal blogs, group sites, or portals like indymedia.

A New Indymedia

Aggregating hubs/nodes in OMN could be represented as the “new indymedia”:

  • These hubs may focus on subjects, countries, regions, or cities.
  • Unlike the centralizing elements of traditional networks, OMN’s open path reduces the need for centralized control.

Licensing and Openness

OMN adheres to open licensing principles:

  • Content is shared freely within the network.
  • Licensing ensures respect for contributors and promotes ethical usage.

Encouraging Collaboration

OMN thrives on contributions and engagement:

  • Leave questions or incomplete ideas to inspire participation.
  • Create linking overviews or summary articles that highlight stories within content flows.
  • Encourage human relationships to grow the trust-based network.

Conclusion

The Open Media Network (OMN) is an ambitious and open-ended project that reimagines decentralized media sharing for the modern web. By fostering collaboration, trust, and ethical practices, OMN empowers participants to build a sustainable and impactful alternative to corporate media platforms.

A call to action, clear diagnosis

What a waste of public money, this #fashernista career-building projects.

When you think using social media is “natural,” remember you’re feeding #dotcons—platforms built on the worst parts of human nature. If you want civilization and society to have a future, you cannot keep supporting this. The #encryptionists sit at the heart of our current grassroots media tech disaster, while careerist #mainstreaming pisses from the other side. But shit makes good compost—and we have the shovels.

OMN is a path forward. Pessimism may travel faster than optimism, but only optimism holds the potential for real change. Feed the problem or solve the problem. There is no mythical “third way” out of this mess. What we have are shovels, #OMN, and shit for compost. Work hard enough, and you’ll get flowers and tasty vegetables. 🌸🥕

It’s well past time for composting. Let’s grow flowers. 🌱

Meany of our old friends in activism took the healthy internal stresses that once challenged projects like #indymedia and fed them to a #fashernista vampire class, building careers by draining the grassroots for 20 years. This is not a good look, and these are likely the people you have to talk through when you talk to “power.”

First step, clearly #stepaway from the #dotcons and return to the #openweb for our communication and news. #indymediaback and #OMN are solutions worth posting about, worth sharing, and worth doing. The #openweb lacks addiction algorithms. It will only thrive if you make it work. Gather like-minded people outside the #dotcons—it’s a solid first step.

We must stop pouring energy into pointless #techshit if we want a chance of surviving #climatechaos and escaping the grip of the #deathcult. Basic #KISS statement: What are you doing today that isn’t pointless?

On this, #indymediaback, #OMN, and the need more crew to make the rollout work. For decades, we’ve allowed the #dotcons to dominate our communication. Trump and Brexit aren’t the causes—they’re symptoms. We made this mess together, fuelled by unhealthy digital feedback loops.

Let’s compost this mess and seed real change. 🌱

Fuck Off to the #Bitcoin Bros and Their Cult of Scarcity

Let me say it loud and clear—again—for the ones in the back: P2P systems that tether their tech to encryptionsist/blockchain coin economy are a dead end. Full stop. Tying this native #openweb path of distributed technology to the idea of selling “resources” doesn’t just miss the point; it’s like engineering a system that’s designed to fail from the start. It’s self-sabotage on a systemic level, shooting yourself in the foot while you’re still lacing up your boots.

Why? Because these systems, heralded by the #Bitcoinbros and their ilk, are about enforcing artificial scarcity into spaces that could—and should—be models of abundance. Instead of embracing the revolutionary potential of #P2P networks to unlock and distribute resources equitably, they double down on the same tired “deathcult” economics of scarcity that brought us to the current mess in the first place.

Coding scarcity into abundance, is the fatal flaw, the beauty of distributed systems lies in their ability to facilitate abundance, bypassing the bottlenecks and hoarding inherent in centralized paths. Yet, what do these “geniuses” do? They take this fertile ground for innovation and graft onto it the same broken logic of capitalism that created the problem. Artificial Scarcity, instead of using resources efficiently and equitably, they introduce a transactional economy that prioritizes profit and competition over collaboration and sharing. Death by design paths embed scarcity into their structure, ensuring they will eventually choke out their own potential. What could and needs to be a fertile cooperative garden becomes a battlefield of extraction and exploitation.

The Bitcoin and crypto crew, with their get-rich-quick schemes, aren’t building the future—they’re pushing us all back into the past, rehashing old hierarchies in a new digital wrapper. Their vision of the world isn’t radical or liberating; it’s just #techshit wearing a suit made of gold leaf and bad ideas.

Then we have the #encryptionistas and their “Common Sense” cult, with the mantra of 90% closed, 10% open might sound like “common sense” to those steeped in fear and control, but what they’re really peddling is the same #deathcult ideology to lock down innovation, stifle collaboration, and strangles the potential of the #openweb path.

Both are enforcing scarcity as though it’s inevitable, despite all evidence to the contrary.
They frame their closed systems as “security,” but what they’re really doing is hoarding power and excluding voices. This isn’t progress; it’s regression. It’s the equivalent of building a massive wall in the middle of the commons and selling tickets to access what was already there for everyone.

The radical alternative is abundance by design, where we don’t need scarcity baked into our systems, we need abundance. We need tools and networks designed to share resources, knowledge, and opportunities without the artificial barriers of token economies and closed ecosystems.

  • P2P systems should empower cooperation, not competition
  • Decentralization should facilitate access, not introduce new forms of gatekeeping.
  • Abundance is the point: The beauty of distributed networks lies in their ability to amplify sharing, not enforce scarcity.

This is where the Open Media Network (#OMN) comes in—a vision rooted in the values of the : Open Data, Open Source, Open Process, and Open Standards. This isn’t about creating a new “elite” made up of the nasty few or another #dotcons “marketplace” policed by the #geekproblem. It’s about building #DIY networks, radically inclusive and genuinely liberatory.

What are we to do with the Bitcoin bros, the #encryptionistas, and their #deathcult economics? Compost them. Take their #techshit, strip it of its toxic scarcity mindset, and use it to fertilize better systems. Systems that prioritize people over profit, collaboration over competition, and abundance over fear.

To those still clinging to the Bitcoin fantasy: Grab a shovel. You’re going to need it—not to mine more tokens, but to bury the bloated corpse of your scarcity-driven ideology. It’s dead weight, and it’s holding us all back. The future belongs to those who can imagine abundance, build it, and share it. Let’s stop walking down the “common sense” dead-end paths and start digging our way out of this mess, composting matters, you likely need a shovel #OMN

Challenging “liberal trolls” and #encryptionist blindness

Addressing liberal trolls and the #openweb tensions, the influx of users following the (#TwitterMigration) has illuminated tensions on the #openweb, particularly the behaviour of “liberal trolls.” Who often advocate for performative inclusivity and impose hierarchical thinking, creating friction in existing decentralized paths. Their presence derails conversations, inhibit grassroots growth, and introduce mainstream patterns of control. What can we do with this mess making:

  1. Reframing the debate: 90% Open, 10% Closed offers a balanced vision. It contrasts sharply with the #encryptionists’ push for 90% closed systems that prioritize secrecy over collaboration. To mediate this, we need to promote openness as resilience to foster diversity, adaptability, and innovation. This “native” path resists co-optation by authoritarian forces, a core concern of #encryptionists. Highlight success stories, examples where openness has thrived, such as Mastodon’s ability to scale post-Twitter Migration without compromising its ethos. Build Bridges to encourage conversations between open and closed proponents. Identify shared values, while challenging “common sense” that hinder collaboration.
  1. Combatting liberal troll dynamics, liberal trolls to often wield performative outrage and self-righteousness as tools for control, sidelining radical ideas. To mitigate their impact: Community moderation with clear values, with moderation policies rooted in grassroots principles—collaboration, inclusion, and respect for dissent. Make these values explicit and widely understood. Empower the margins by supporting voices from underrepresented radical communities to counterbalance dominant narratives. Ignore the noise, trolls thrive on attention. Strategic non-engagement, combined with clear policies, reduce their disruptive influence.
  1. Addressing the #geekproblem and blocking energy, the #geekproblem is characterized by a resistance to radical ideas and community-focused solutions, creating unspoken barriers to progress in tech spaces. We need strategies to overcome this by making tech accessible to non-geeks with user-friendly designs and intuitive experiences. This diminishes the gatekeeping power of overly technical communities. Distributed Leadership encourages non-hierarchical, collective decision-making. This prevents a few individuals from exerting outsized influence over grassroots tech projects. Education and outreach, equip newcomers with the tools and knowledge to navigate #openweb spaces, reducing reliance on geek-centric paths.
  1. Resisting destructive cult paths, #NGO-driven power grabs and for “cult-like” behaviour needs to safeguard against by fostering decentralized power structures. Encourage healthy conflict by normalize constructive disagreements as part of openweb culture. This reduces the potential for groupthink and authoritarian tendencies. Recognize and resist co-optation by staying vigilant against efforts to co-opt grassroots movements for institutional and corporate interests.
  1. Building radical resilience, to mediate the blocking energy and empower radical tech, we need proactive strategies. Create paths for experimentation, this might include enclaves where radical ideas can be tested without suppression and co-optation. Foster allyship by building alliances between radical movements and pragmatic reformers to amplify shared goals. Challenge “Common Sense” imposition of “practical” solutions that dilute grassroots paths and values. Embrace creative, “mad and bad” ideas to disrupt this status quo blocking.

In conclusion, the path of the #openweb depends on striking a balance between openness and security, grassroots experimentation and mainstream scalability, and decentralization and coordination. By mediating the mess brought into our spaces by liberal trolls, encryptionist ideologies, and the #geekproblem, we can create a more resilient digital ecosystem that is a path of radical innovation and community-driven change and challenge we need in the era of #climatechaos and social brack down. On this path, radical ideas are not only welcomed but celebrated #KISS

#Mainstreaming Social Media: Digital Drugs, Not Social Connection

The essence of #mainstreaming social media isn’t about fostering genuine communication or community—it’s about delivering digital drugs. Platforms like #Facebook, #Instagram, and #TikTok thrive by exploiting addictive design patterns, keeping users hooked with endless dopamine hits.

This addiction is why many people struggle to stay on native #openweb social media platforms. These alternatives, built with at their core, lack the engineered highs of the #dotcons. Without the “fix” of notifications, likes, and algorithmically curated content, people feel withdrawal and gravitate back to the platforms designed to exploit learned their impulses.

The challenge of real meaningful outreach on the #openweb, is to address this addiction cycle. It’s not enough to offer better tools or ethical platforms; we need to actively incorporate digital drug detox into the user experience (#UX). This means, designing for intentional use, replacing infinite scrolling, endless notifications with features that encourage mindful engagement.
Rebuilding reward systems on genuine connections, creativity, and learning instead of shallow metrics like likes and shares. Educating people to recognize and break free from the addictive patterns perpetuated by #dotcons.

A detox-focused UX for the #openweb is shifting focus from passive content consumption to active participation in meaningful communities. This path to breaking free from digital addiction is no small task, but it’s needed for building any sustainable future. The #openweb can lead to this shift, offering not just an alternative, but a detox from the digital drug cycle that defines #mainstreaming social media mess.

Supporting Native Grassroots Projects in the Fediverse

To balance the current #mainstreaming outreach in the #Fediverse, we’re rallying support for several native grassroots projects. These initiatives empower underrepresented voices and strengthen community-driven networks. With funding applications submitted to NLnet, we invite your comments, feedback, and wide sharing of these proposals. Here’s an overview of the projects:

  1. The MakingHistory Project

A collaborative effort to create a decentralized and participatory network for documenting and sharing:

Grassroots movements
Historical events
Underrepresented narratives

This initiative empowers communities to control their own stories and ensure diverse histories are preserved and accessible.

  1. IndymediaBack Project

A Fediverse project to reboot the radical grassroots media network, #Indymedia, with a foundation in trust-based principles:

#4opens: Open Data, Open Source, Open Process, and Open Standards

This project aims to restore Indymedia as a vital, decentralized platform for radical journalism and activism.

  1. The OGB Project

Focused on creating a trust-based, decentralized framework for governance, the #OGB project supports:

Grassroots networks
Community-driven decision-making

Its goal is to enable fair, transparent, and inclusive governance for communities striving for equity and sustainability.

On all the projects your feedback and support can make a difference. Let’s work together to build goodwill and foster consensus around “native” projects. If you believe in decentralization, trust-based systems, and grassroots empowerment, please comment, share widely, and help to create a stronger, more inclusive future.

Naming the problem, a first step on this path, what is the #deathcult

Naming the problem is a first step, let’s take a step, what is the #deathcult? The “death cult” refers to the systemic prioritization of profit, consumption, and power over life, sustainability, and equity. Relentless resource extraction, despite environmental collapse. Neoliberal policies that sacrifice public good for corporate gains. And most importantly, the dogmatic passive social complicity in maintaining these destructive paths.

Active vs. default worship, active worshippers are leaders, corporations, and influencers who knowingly drive destructive practices. Default worshippers, are the majority who, often unknowingly, sustain the system through everyday actions shaped by a lack of alternatives and awareness.

To challenge default worship, there is the normal path of awareness and education, campaigns that demystify the ways neoliberalism and climate inaction shape everyday life. On the fluffy side, practical Steps for people and communities, join or start local climate and justice groups. Advocate for sustainable policies in your community (e.g., green energy, public transit). This is about shifting narratives, a core part of this is contributing to independent media and grassroots storytelling. A second thread is practical building resilience by developing skills and networks for mutual aid, local food systems, and sustainable living.

Then the is creating alternatives, by invest in and promote grassroots initiatives like community energy projects, mutual aid networks, and cooperative economies. Supporting platforms and movements that embody values of sustainability, equity, and transparency (e.g., the fediverse, initiatives).

This then needs to be balanced by more radical action, mobilizing for more immediate change, direct action, organizing protests, strikes, and civil disobedience to demand systemic shifts. Then celebrating and amplify these stories of resistance and regeneration.

#dotcons fail human connection

We do need a critique of the trajectory of social media platforms like Facebook and Instagram, to highlight how their growing reliance on AI-generated profiles and diminishing organic engagement undermines the little trust, satisfaction, and the purpose of social connection that people have left in them.

This started with the death of organic engagement, Facebook and Instagram’s shift around 2013 to force content creators and businesses to pay for visibility, marked the end of organic engagement for the majority of people. This created a reliance on paid boosts, alienating real people and the army of small creators who pushed the platforms into prominence. Without organic engagement, people feel unseen, leading to declining satisfaction. The current shift to AI-generated profiles and bots are an attempt to simulate “engagement”, the illusion of interaction.

It should be simple to see that #dotcons fail to fulfill the human need for connection and actually alienate people and communities, even if this shift manages to build short-term engagement with profiles and “interactions” to create “likable” fictional characters for product placement. Replace human influencers with bots is cost efficiency. Feeding artificially inflate metrics to attract advertisers. But as people become more aware of bots replacing humans, the sense of authenticity diminishes, particularly among those who value any real social connections.

    As I have been arguing for 20 years there is a real need for alternatives, #DIY and grassroots movements, platforms like the #Fediverse and open-source projects demonstrate that decentralized networks prioritize human connection and transparency over profit. These alternative resist capture by corporate interests and maintain authenticity, creating #openweb ecosystems where trust and interaction thrive.

    Embracing “messiness” is a feature in effective tech solutions

    Embracing “messiness” as a feature, not a bug, in creating humane and effective tech solutions.
    Why messiness matters, real-world social paths are inherently messy. Attempting to design tech solutions that are rigid, “perfect” systems leads to failure because they cannot adapt to human complexity and unpredictability. Projects that actually work in messy environments prioritize flexibility, openness, and adaptability over strict control and rigid frameworks.

    Wikipedia is a messy, decentralized project that thrives because it prioritizes community and collaboration over technical perfection. The #Fediverse, with its federated nature, allows for diverse approaches and experimentation, embracing a level of messiness to resist centralization and foster creativity.

    Code is a tool, not the goal, the value of software lies in its social impact—how people use it—not in the technical complexity or “cleverness” of the code itself. Over emphasizing code at the expense of social “use” creates #techchurn and decay. Projects without meaningful use end up abandoned, despite the sometimes impressive technical work. The practical path we argue for, is to prioritize designing for social utility, not only technical performance.

    The #geekproblem we need to mediate is the churn of #techshit, of developers focusing too heavily on technical aspects, ignoring the social context and long-term utility of their work. This results in churn—continuous cycles of development with little lasting value—adding to the pile of decaying, unused code.

    What are #KISS paths to avoid this, a simple first step is involving non-technical voices early in the process to ensure social relevance and usability. Use iterative development methods that prioritize real-world feedback over technical perfection. Embracing the : Open Data, Open Source, Open “industrial” standards, Open Process. Build for use, not show, with simplicity and usability over technical complexity. Engage people in testing and iterating early and often. Embrace the mess, imperfections and unpredictability are part of the process.

    Strategies to build messy, human-centric projects: Start with the “Why”, clearly define the social purpose of the project before writing any code. What problem are you solving? Who benefits, and how?

    #KISS

    The #Fediverse is native to anti-common-sense governance

    My view of this is passionate and grounded in years of experience, weaving together themes of grassroots activism, technology, governance, and the mounting challenges of #climatechaos leading to social collapse.

    On this Alt path, the two often pushed liberal #foundation models, with their failures, can lead grassroots, community-driven projects to become corporate tools, diverting resources toward maintaining the status quo rather than fostering innovation and social change. Examples of open source capture, projects like OpenAI initially emphasized openness but became increasingly closed and profit-driven once corporate interests got involved. The highlights the ease of capture by “#fashionista agendas.”

    These failures underscore the need for governance models that resist centralization and co-option. The DIY, bottom-up approach is a powerful counter to these trends. #OGB and #DIY as tools for resistance and grassroots empowerment. Why #OGB Matters, the path aligns with the fediverse’s ethos by emphasizing non-elitism, democracy, and simplicity. By prioritizing KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) principles, it remains accessible and adaptable, ensuring that governance grows organically rather than being imposed.

    The #Fediverse is native to anti-common-sense governance, centralized platforms like Facebook and Twitter impose governance that aligns with corporate agendas, prioritizing profit over social good. Decentralized networks like the Fediverse allow for experimentation with governance paths that are participatory and community-driven.

    This is an opening and opportunities for anti-“common sense” tools, reputation networks, build trust through reputation rather than encryption aligns with human-centric approaches. This moves away from paranoia-driven models (“trust nobody”) to systems that foster community bonds. The Fediverse can be a template, with the decentralized, anarchistic roots of the fediverse providing a sandbox for developing governance models to influence broader #openweb paths.

    Combating the #deathcult mentality, social collapse and climatechaos, the persistence of policies and behaviours that prioritize short-term gains over long-term survival, is a defining feature of the “deathcult” we keep talking about. Examples, governments doubling down on fossil fuels despite clear evidence of climate catastrophe. Corporate greenwashing that markets unsustainable practices as solutions.

    In the #OMN and philosophy, simplicity matters, complexity often alienates the very communities that systems aim to empower. The OMN’s emphasis on simplicity ensures accessibility, fostering broader participation. The , Open Data, Open Code, Open Access, and Open Process form a foundation for transparency and trust, essential for building resilience against co-option.

    Practical applications are reputation paths, tools that prioritize human connections over algorithms, to strengthen communities. Human-readable systems avoiding jargon-heavy and technical solutions ensures the governance model remains inclusive. Let’s keep this #KISS