Application 2025-02-032 Open Governance Body #OGB

Application 2025-02-032 Open Governance Body #OGB received

The following submission was recorded by NLnet. Thanks for your application, we look forward to learning more about your proposed project.
Contact

name
hamish campbell
phone
email
hamish@visionon.tv
organisation name
OMN
country
UK
consent
You may keep my data on record

Project

code
2025-02-032
project name
Open Governance Body #OGB
fund
Commons_Fund
requested amount
€ 50000
website

    https://unite.openworlds.info/Open-Media-Network/openwebgovernancebody

synopsis

A project designed to create a trust-based, decentralized framework for governance within grassroots networks and communities. Rooted in the #4opens principles—open data, open source, open processes, and open standards—the #OGB seeks to mediate human-to-human collaboration by fostering trust, transparency, and simplicity (#KISS).

Its primary focus is addressing the #geekproblem by bridging technical and social flows, creating tools that empower people to organize effectively without falling into hierarchical or centralized traps. The #OGB builds on trust to sift through noise, allowing genuine contributions to rise, moving from complexity to simplicity and back to complexity organically.

The expected outcomes include:

Strengthened grassroots governance: Tools for decision-making and collaboration that are inclusive and scalable.
A thriving #openweb ecosystem: Platforms and networks that prioritize trust and social value over profit.
Mediation of mainstreaming and NGO influence: Keeping progressive activism focused on spiky, meaningful change rather than fluffy distractions.

The #OGB aims to create sustainable digital commons that nurture resilience, diversity, and real-world impact.

experience

Yes, I’ve been involved in projects and communities aligned with the ethos and goals of the #OGB. My contributions span technical development, advocacy, and fostering open governance frameworks, all rooted in the principles of trust, transparency, and collaboration.

Indymedia, I was an active contributor to the global Indymedia movement, which played a pivotal role in grassroots media and decentralized collaboration. My contributions focused on: Open publishing workflows to empower communities to share their stories. Advocating for the “trust at the edges” model to ensure decision-making remained grassroots-driven. Bridging technical and social challenges by helping develop and maintain tools that aligned with the movement’s values.
OMN (Open Media Network), As one of the key proponents of the #OMN, I’ve worked to reboot grassroots media using trust-based networks and federated tools. My contributions include: Developing the concept of #4opens (open data, open source, open processes, open standards) to serve as a foundational framework. Advocating for federated tools like #ActivityPub and #RSS to enable media flows across decentralized networks. Organizing collaborative spaces to design tools that prioritize human-to-human trust rather than algorithms or centralized control.
Fediverse Advocacy, Within the Fediverse, I’ve championed the importance of grassroots governance and resisting the co-option of these spaces by corporate or NGO interests. Contributions include: Participating in discussions to shape decentralized protocols like #ActivityPub. Pushing for #KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) principles to ensure accessibility and scalability. Highlighting the dangers of #mainstreaming and proposing strategies to mediate its impact on the #openweb.
Open Governance Experiments, I’ve collaborated on smaller experimental governance projects aimed at exploring new ways of mediating human collaboration. For example: Designing trust-based moderation systems to reduce #geekproblem domination in decision-making processes. Implementing open-process methodologies to ensure transparency in workflows. Mediating conflicts between technical and social contributors, fostering productive collaboration.

Core Contributions Across Projects, across all these initiatives, my primary focus has been on bridging the technical and human aspects of governance. This involves: Developing frameworks that enable decentralized decision-making while maintaining trust. Advocating for simplicity to combat the paralysis caused by unnecessary complexity. Building alliances and mediating the challenges posed by #dotcons, #NGO dominance, and #geekproblem tendencies.

Through these efforts, I’ve gained insights into the challenges of building sustainable governance models in decentralized spaces, and the #OGB embodies the culmination of this work. It’s a step forward in creating robust, trust-based networks that empower communities to take control of their digital and social spaces.

usage

Budget Allocation for #OGB Project

The requested budget will be allocated strategically to ensure the project’s foundational development and long-term sustainability. An outline of key areas:

Technical Development and Infrastructure (40%) Development of Core Tools: Funding will support developers to build the initial version of the #OGB code, focusing on simplicity, accessibility, and scalability. Server Infrastructure: Setting up and maintaining federated servers for testing, development, and early adoption. Integration with Existing Standards: Work to align with protocols like #ActivityPub, #Nostr and #RSS, ensuring seamless interoperability with the broader #openweb ecosystem.
Community Building and Outreach (25%) Workshops and Training: Organizing sessions to train communities on the #OGB framework, focusing on trust-based governance and open-process workflows. Content Creation: Developing accessible documentation, tutorials, and guides to demystify the #OGB model for diverse audiences. Engagement Campaigns: Reaching out to grassroots organizations, activists, and communities to onboard early adopters.
Research and Iterative Design (20%) User Feedback Loops: Conducting trials with early adopters to gather insights and refine the tools and processes. Governance Framework Refinement: Exploring different trust-based models to ensure inclusivity and adaptability to various contexts. Conflict Mediation Strategies: Testing and integrating mechanisms for conflict resolution and power balance within the #OGB framework.
Administrative and Miscellaneous Costs (15%) Project Coordination: Funding part-time coordinators to manage timelines, resources, and community engagement. Operational Expenses: Covering software donations, events, domain hosting, and other minor but essential operational costs.

Past and Present Funding Sources. The #OGB project is currently unfunded in a formal sense, operating entirely through volunteer contributions. However, it is rooted in a history of collaborative efforts from related initiatives, which have benefited from in-kind support rather than direct funding.

Past Sources: #OMN and #Indymedia Communities: Provided foundational concepts and voluntary contributions of time, skills, and infrastructure. Fediverse and #Activertypub Advocates: Offered insights and testing environments for early experimentation with governance ideas.

challenges

Present Sources: Volunteer Contributions: Core contributors are donating their time and resources to push the project forward. Allied Projects: Informal support from related decentralized tech communities, sharing knowledge, feedback, and occasional resources.

Future Vision, while external funding is vital to accelerate the project’s development, we aim to maintain independence and adhere to the #4opens principles. By minimizing reliance on corporate or NGO funding, we ensure that the #OGB remains a grassroots-driven initiative. Our long-term goal is to establish a self-sustaining model through community contributions and shared ownership, embodying the trust-based governance the project seeks to promote.

Detailed budget breakdown can be attached if required.

comparison

The #OGB (Open Governance Body) project stands on the shoulders of both historical and contemporary efforts, drawing lessons from their successes and failures to craft a novel path to decentralized governance.

A comparative analysis: Historical Projects and Their Influence

Indymedia (Independent Media Centers) Overview: Indymedia was a global network of grassroots media collectives that emerged in the late 1990s to provide a platform for independent journalism. It embodied principles of openness, decentralization, and non-hierarchical governance. Comparison: Like Indymedia, #OGB aims to empower communities through open and decentralized structures. However, Indymedia struggled with governance conflicts and centralization of power in some regions. The #OGB addresses these issues through trust-based networks, conflict mediation mechanisms, and scalable governance tools. Key Takeaway: The #OGB builds on the ethos of Indymedia while implementing technological solutions to mitigate governance bottlenecks.

Occupy Movement’s General Assemblies. Overview: Occupy’s assemblies were experiments in direct democracy, emphasizing inclusivity and consensus-based decision-making. However, the lack of structured governance led to inefficiency and internal conflicts. Comparison: The #OGB shares Occupy’s commitment to participatory governance but incorporates trust-based models to build the decision-making. Instead of full consensus, the #OGB employs trust networks to delegate decisions while retaining accountability and inclusivity. Key Takeaway: The #OGB leverages structured trust-based governance to overcome the decision-making paralysis often seen in consensus-driven movements.

Contemporary Projects and Their Relationship to #OGB. Fediverse and #ActivityPub. Overview: The Fediverse is a decentralized network of federated platforms like Mastodon, powered by the ActivityPub protocol it is pushing user autonomy and grassroots control but has faced challenges around governance and moderation.
Comparison: The #OGB complements the Fediverse by providing governance structures for federated projects, addressing the ongoing issues of moderation and decision-making. The #OGB’s trust networks align with the decentralized ethos of the Fediverse, offering a scalable solution for community self-governance. Key Takeaway: The #OGB enhances the governance layer missing in many Fediverse projects, fostering resilience and collaboration across federated networks.

NGO-Led Open Source Initiatives. Overview: Many open-source projects are managed by NGOs, which often prioritize stability and funding over grassroots participation. This has led to criticism of centralized decision-making and “corporate capture.” Comparison: The #OGB resists NGO-style top-down management, instead prioritizing the #4opens principles: open data, open source, open process, and open standards. Unlike NGO-driven projects, the #OGB is inherently community-first, ensuring power remains with the users and contributors. Key Takeaway: The #OGB rejects the NGO-centric model, emphasizing trust-based grassroots governance to avoid co-option by external actors.

Lessons from Historical Failures. CouchSurfing’s Decline. Overview: CouchSurfing transitioned from a grassroots volunteer-driven project to a for-profit company, alienating its core community and undermining trust. Comparison: The #OGB guards against such shifts by embedding trust and open governance at its core, ensuring the project remains community-owned and operated. Key Takeaway: Trust-based governance prevents mission drift and maintains alignment with the community’s original values.

P2P Projects and Overengineering. Overview: Many P2P initiatives have failed due to technical complexity and a lack of user-friendly interfaces, alienating non-technical users. Comparison: The #OGB adheres to the #KISS principle (Keep It Simple, Stupid), ensuring accessibility and ease of adoption without sacrificing functionality. Key Takeaway: Simplicity is essential for widespread adoption and long-term viability.

Key Differentiators of the #OGB Trust-Based Networks. Unlike purely consensus-driven or hierarchical models, the #OGB employs trust-based networks to enable efficient and inclusive decision-making at scale. The #4opens Framework. The #OGB is grounded in the #4opens principles, ensuring transparency, accountability, and openness across all aspects of the project. Focus on Digital Commons. The #OGB is designed to nurture digital commons, creating a space for grassroots innovation, collaboration, and governance that resists corporate capture. Composting the #TechShit, creating fertile ground for genuine social innovation.

Expected Outcomes. The #OGB aims to fill the governance gap left by historical and contemporary efforts, fostering a resilient, open, and trust-based framework for digital collaboration. By learning from the past and building on existing technologies, we seek to empower communities to reclaim the #openweb, bridging the gap between technology and grassroots activism.

The #OGB project faces significant challenges in implementing scalable trust-based governance systems. Key technical hurdles include:

Interoperability: Ensuring seamless integration with existing open protocols like #ActivityPub and the widening #openweb reboot.
Usability: Creating user-friendly interfaces to make complex governance processes accessible to non-technical people.
Resilience: Building systems resistant to malicious actors and spam within decentralized networks.

Are a few issues.

ecosystem

The #OGB project is rooted in a diverse ecosystem of grassroots organizations, decentralized communities, and open-source initiatives.

Ecosystem Description

Grassroots Communities: Activist groups, independent media collectives, and community-driven initiatives seeking alternatives to hierarchical decision-making.
FOSS Developers: Open-source software developers invested in decentralized tools, such as #ActivityPub, #Mastodon, and related protocols.
NGOs and Advocacy Groups: Organizations interested in participatory governance and transparency tools for improving their operations.
Tech Enthusiasts: People exploring ethical and sustainable technology beyond the centralized #dotcons paradigm.
Academic and Research Institutions: Scholars studying governance, social movements, and decentralized technologies.

Engagement Strategies

Collaborative Development: Open, participatory development processes underpinned by the #4opens philosophy (open data, source, process, and standards).
Workshops and Webinars: Educating target audiences about trust-based governance and the project’s tools.
Partnerships: Building alliances with aligned organizations, including community networks and FOSS projects.
Documentation and Guides: Creating accessible materials to help communities adopt #OGB principles and tools.
Pilot Projects: Collaborating with grassroots organizations to implement and refine governance systems, ensuring practical impact.

Promotion of Outcomes

Demonstration Projects: Showcasing successful case studies of #OGB governance in action.
Fediverse Integration: Leveraging federated platforms for dissemination and collaboration.
Open Events: Participating in conferences, hackathons, and public forums to share insights and foster adoption

GOVERNANCE-BODY_REV-March-2022.pdf
OGB-dev.png

Outlining the “native” #openweb path

Honesty is about laying out a stark accurate critique of the current situation, particularly the barriers posed by #mainstreaming progressives, #NGO parasites, and the broader tech churn. We need to build on the vision for mediating this #blocking and advancing real change through the #OMN projects.

First step is to mediate the blocking, to compost the #shitpile by applying the #4opens rigorously as a filter to weed out the 90% of crap. Projects that don’t align with these principles should be sidelined. Then we need more trust networks, like #OGB and OMN to build trust-based paths, reducing noise and focusing on genuine contributions.

Shift focus from #fluffy to #spiky, by calling out #NGO parasites, to challenge and expose organizations that drain focus and energy without contributing to real change. Push for spiky agendas, embrace messy, hard, and meaningful work rather than safe, feel-good approaches that reinforce the status quo.

Simplify to build complexity, by simplicity first, start with clear tools and frameworks like the 4opens and grow complexity organically through collaborative work. Reject digital drugs, the dotcons’ attempts to lull movements into compliance with endless distractions and complexity masquerading as progress.

Breaking the #mainstreaming trap, by creating focused campaigns targeting progressive allies to pull them out of the mainstream and into trust-based grassroots movements. Use storytelling, art, and direct action to expose the limitations of mainstreaming progressivism.

Build bridges to wider communities, start with small, resilient networks that are human-scale. Expand outward from these trusted cores to bring in diverse voices and new ideas. Avoid purity tests—recognize that we’re all smeared with dotcons culture and approach people where they are. The world we’re building with OMN—a future where simplicity leads to complexity—requires a shift in ideology. It’s about moving people from passive consumption under the #dotcons to active participation in building a better, progressive world.

On this path are there any humans out there? If so, the choice is simple but profound, join efforts like the #OMN. Embrace the tools and principles of the #4opens. Compost the shit and grow something real. The question isn’t whether change is needed—it’s whether we have the courage and wisdom to make it happen. For those ready to move past the #blocking, now’s the time to pick up the shovel. 🌱

What we need to do

A direct line between the challenges of the #mainstreaming of the #openweb and the critical need for tools like the #4opens to address these challenges. The #mainstreaming of the openweb brings visibility and new energy but also risks flooding it with shallow “common sense” that undermines its foundational values. The 4opens is your shovel, a tool for mediating this balance and preserving the integrity of the ecosystem.

Tools to Shift the Balance: #4opens as a Guiding Principle: Ensure every project or platform respects:
Open data
Open source
Open standards
Open processes

Use this framework to evaluate and pressure projects co-opted by corporate or NGO agendas. This will “naturally” lead to community-led governance to keep control in the hands of users and communities, avoiding capture by #dotcons or other hierarchical structures.

The urgency of the #geekproblem is aptly named—it is a paradox where geeks often already “have all the solutions” but lack the social frameworks to implement them. This disconnect exacerbates issues and entrenched systemic failures.

Shifting from individualism to collectivism to balance “stupid individualism” which fills tech culture, to foster collaboration and shared responsibility. Root the work in #nothingnew to focus on proven solutions and resist the allure of constant innovation for its own sake. Embed ecological awareness to tie technological development directly to ecological paths we need, making sustainability a core design principle.

Shovel Work, encourages collective efforts to “compost the #techshit” and build sustainable alternatives. This promotes the slow and messy work of growing robust, community-driven ecosystems rather than relying on quick-fix solutions.

Call to action – Use or Lose – The healthy #openweb development community needs active engagement. Whether through contributing to existing projects, advocating for the 4opens, or simply resisting the co-option of open spaces, it’s time to pick up the shovel and start digging. The message is clear: there’s no magic, just work. The #OMN and #4opens provide the framework and the tools—we need to use them before they’re buried under the weight of the mainstream’s common sense.

Laying the groundwork for a future worth building

Tieing together the threads of agency, ecological awareness, and social cohesion helps to envision a transformative path forward for the #openweb. Focusing on “Us” Over “Them”, focusing on “us” rather than “them” is grounded in practicality. We have influence over our own communities and movements, while exerting control over entrenched corporate powers like the #dotcons is limited and fraught with risk.

Mandating interoperability bridges systems, breaking monopolies and fostering open collaboration. However, #mainstreaming lobbying and PR by corporations are significant risks to these paths, so any legislative push must come with robust grassroots advocacy. Privacy/data laws, could backfire under corporate influence. This strong open community involvement is essential to avoid harmful outcomes that entrench corporate power while undermining freedoms.

The ecological and social metaphor, analogy of composting connects the ecological and social crises. “Common sense” as capitalism or conservatism is a shallow construct, rooted in entrenched power structures and outdated norms. Composting represents the transformative process needed to break down this “shitpile” and nourish new growth.

Human “leaking”, people inherently “leak data and metadata” is insightful. Instead of trying to prevent this natural behavior, we focus on mediating and redistributing control of these flows in ways that are healthy and liberating. Fighting over these flows, as we see in current “#geekproblems,” only blocks human society, hindering the change and challenge needed to address issues like #climatechaos.

The rise of postmodern relativism and bad faith actors is a significant barrier to social change. Mediating this problem resonates, as unchecked postmodernism erodes trust and creates endless cycles of cynicism. The #4opens as a constitution, by embedding the #4opens into the DNA of projects like the #OMN, you can create a framework that:

Anchors trust and transparency in a “post-truth” world.
Supports diversity and pluralism while resisting co-option by bad actors.
Encourages collective agency by providing a stable foundation for digital commons.

To escape the current “common sense,” we need to build alternative spaces grounded in social value. The #OMN, driven by the #4opens, can act as a scaffold for this transformation, fostering digital commons where meaningful change flourishes.

Steps we can take: Invest in bridge technologies: Expand the use of #ActivityPub and #RSS to connect people and platforms organically. Focus on Localism: Strengthen community-run servers and federated systems to build resilient networks from the ground up. Challenge Corporate Narratives: Advocate for laws and systems that prioritize interoperability and openness, while resisting harmful privacy/data policies. Normalize Composting as a Metaphor: Encourage broader acceptance of composting as both an ecological and cultural imperative—breaking down the “shitpile” to nourish growth.

Emphasis on liberating spaces and fostering creativity as a foundation for a thriving, equitable #openweb. By composting the failures of the past and focusing on collective agency, we lay the groundwork for a future worth building. 🌱

Inspiration to pick up the shovel to compost the current mess

A sharp observation on the current state of the “left” and the misplaced focus of many tech strategies. The “left” indeed needs a reboot—moving away from insular infighting and embracing the broader, structural challenges that demand collective action. Meanwhile in tech, the “encryptionists” still try to dominate the tech discourse, promoting a narrow focus on privacy and security. While important, encryption should only be a part of a larger strategy that prioritizes openness and public-first values.

The claques and process problems, are a classic example of what happens when communities lose sight of their broader mission. Internal cliques, or claques, become echo chambers for negativity rather than fostering productive dialogue. The result? A stagnation of ideas and a chicken-and-egg problem, where no one knows how to break the cycle of blame and inertia.

Social value vs. personal value, is a key point worth emphasizing, many misunderstand this concept, conflating the two or expecting direct personal benefit from initiatives designed to serve the collective good. Social value is about creating systems, tools, and frameworks that benefit communities at large—fostering collaboration, trust, and shared resources. Personal value arises indirectly from being part of a thriving ecosystem of shared social value. It’s a by-product, not the primary goal.

This misunderstanding leads to frustration, as people struggle to see “what’s in it for me” in the short term. An example of this is that building the #OMN isn’t about immediate personal gratification; it’s about laying the groundwork for a healthier, more sustainable ecosystem where everyone can thrive in the long run.

For this path to work, we need a balanced strategy, we need to see encryption as a tool, not the goal, privacy matters, but it’s not the be-all and end-all. We need to focus on transparency and openness to create paths that work for people, not just the tech-savvy few. For this, we need the rebooting of collaboration to move beyond backbiting and cliques. We need to rebuild trust and focus on shared goals rather than individual grievances. This path is social value first, collective well-being over individual gain. This shift in mindset is a #KISS step for meaningful change.

Clearing the misunderstanding, struggling to see the bigger picture, to repeat, my example the #OMN isn’t about you—it’s about us. Personal value emerges naturally when the social foundation is strong. By focusing on collective systems that work, we all stand to benefit indirectly, even if it’s not immediately visible. Let’s keep our eyes on the real prize: a world where openness, trust, and collaboration outshine fear, control, and isolation.

Metaphors matter, composting the current paths in #AI

This #AI-meets-copyright consultation is another wave of opportunistic grafting, much like the #crypto mess before it. The rhetoric about leveraging AI to “grow the economy” and “improve public services” is justification for a “commons” grab by nasty interests. It’s another pushing in the ongoing path of #deathcult worship, 40 years of #neoliberalism, digging us deeper into a hole we desperately need to climb out of.

The metaphor of composting captures the urgent need for discernment, what cultural and technological artefacts still serve us in the onrushing era of #climatechaos, and what is toxic and must urgently be composted. People ask what do we mean by this, in its cultural sense, composting is about adapting the remnants of the deathcult into something fertile for a radically different way of life. This is achievable only if we act swiftly to embrace radical change while there’s still time for the metaphor to remain metaphorical. Delay, and #climatechaos will render the metaphor physical—turning our cities, infrastructure, and economies into literal waste piles, where the nasty few will be left to fights over the scraps.

This urgent need for sorting what’s salvageable from what’s dead weight, requires critical thinking and collaborative effort to work, we need projects like the #OGB to build affinity groups of action, to balence radical action with consensus-building. While consensus about the failures of the last 40 years is important, we need to avoid falling into the trap of endless sterile deliberation. The urgency of the moment demands bold, practical actions to balance the needed intellectual and rhetorical critique.

The metaphorical shovel is right there—let’s use it. What we need, is a clear framework (#OMN) to identify what is compostable (ideas, tools, and systems that can support a degrowth future) and what must be discarded to the compost heap. A part of this is cultural agitation to shake people out of their complacency, as the economy of thinking must shift radically. This has to be shaped as a positive path to community resilience, building networks capable of mutual support, rooted in trust and regenerative practices, not the default #deathcult’s control/fear paradigm we are currently walking.

The push to #AI is part of a “last binge” of neoliberal exploitation, its largely irrelevance currently to the path we need to take, we need to urgently ignore and shift #mainstreaming conversations. The challenge is to redirect the narrative, how can we use our technology to empower grassroots alternatives to build a post-deathcult world? We need this in tandem with radical action to ensure the future remains fertile for new growth. Delay, and we’ll find ourselves buried under the non-compostable remnants of a civilization too slow to adapt. Time to grab that shovel. #OMN

Breaking the cycle of #mainstreaming and liberal trolling

Liberal trolls, deeply embedded in the “common sense” framework of the #deathcult (neoliberalism), derive their identity and value from upholding its norms. When confronted with thinking that challenges these assumptions, their sense of self-worth feels threatened. This leads to defensive behaviors like #blocking, which create echo chambers and alienate broader, constructive conversations.

The result is a destructive cycle of isolation, where strong blocking cuts people off from dissenting views, deepening their entrenchment. Collapse is often the ending of this path, mental strain of constant reinforcement without growth leads to emotional “cave-ins.” this trauma, ripple out to the communities involved, stalling progress and fostering distrust.

To avoid losing our #fashernistas (those drawn to trends but lacking deep roots), we need strategies that balance openness with resilience: build safe spaces for exploration, where people can explore ideas without fear of “cancelling.” These spaces should be guided by openness and trust (#KISS), ensuring that conversations remain productive.

The liberal mindset struggles with change because it feels personal. Providing tools for emotional resilience—like reframing challenges as opportunities for growth—can help bridge the gap. This isn’t therapy, but a practical way to address defensiveness.

Define ideas in simple, grounded terms, for example the #deathcult isn’t just a metaphor; it’s a way to name destructive systems. #Mainstreaming is the tendency to conform rather than change and challenge. This kind of clarity helps those trapped in “common sense” paths see the alternatives without feeling overwhelmed.

Focus on collective paths, isolation breeds fear, but collective efforts inspire trust. Projects like the #OMN are excellent examples of how shared goals can create spaces for diverse voices to thrive. By working together, we create a counterbalance to the individualistic tendencies of the #deathcult.

The goal is to avoid the traps of entrenched “common sense” thinking while maintaining compassion for those caught in it. Liberal trolls can evolve if given the right tools and opportunities, but the process will be messy. By fostering openness, resilience, and collective action, we can help individuals—and communities—climb out of the holes they’ve dug, without burying them under the weight of their past mistakes. Let’s turn the debris into compost and plant something worth growing. 🌱 #OMN

A compass for the #openweb

In a world spiralling deeper into “post-truth,” we’re bombarded by complexity, much of it fuelled by #techchurn and the hollow distractions of #fashernist culture. To cut through noise, we need clarity, that starts with defining basic terms. From the #KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid) path, for a tech-focused lens:

Left = Open/Trust
Right = Control/Fear

This division isn’t only simple dogmatic political; it’s a foundational question of values. Do we build from paths rooted in trust and openness, or do we fall into the normal fear-driven hierarchies of control? The current complexity, without clear values, becomes a swamp, where movements stagnate, progressive progress collapses, and meaningful change evaporates. The mess we have been in for the last 20 years.

Complexity is a dead end, without #KISS clarity, much of the tech world, and by extension, in a world shaped by #dotcons, society, is locked in loops of “common sense” failure. Vertical hierarchies, even well-meaning ones, tend to falter when addressing horizontal, community-driven efforts. It’s less a question of structure and more about values. Without shared trust and openness, even the best technology will fail to create anything lasting or transformative.

Post-truth “common sense”, control and fear, feeds directly into the #deathcult of neoliberalism—a system that thrives on exploitation and reinforces itself as the ONLY viable path. This is the comfort zone for many: worshipping growth, power, and profit as if there’s no alternative. Building away from this with social truth, grounded in shared values and trust, is hard work, but it’s the only viable counterbalance. Without it, we’re just digging ourselves deeper into the pit of stinking social and #techshit.

The #OMN needs a crew with shovels, not worshippers, to work to compost this mess. To reboot the #openweb, we need tools, not temples. The Open Media Network (#OMN) is such a shovel. It’s a framework for creating fertile ground where horizontal values can thrive. Verticals often resist this because they’re entrenched in control structures. Yet, history has shown that without horizontal integration—grassroots participation, open governance, and shared ownership—movements fail to achieve meaningful, lasting impact.

We’ve spent too many years building on complexity, expecting it to fix the very problems it creates. Instead, let’s simplify. Define values clearly, prioritize openness and trust, and focus on practical tools like #OMN and #OGB. Yes, this is a messy process—shovelling always is—but it’s the only way to compost the “shit” of the #deathcult into something that can grow.

It’s time to stop chasing the distractions of #techchurn and #fashernist thinking. Pick up the shovel, embrace #KISS, and start digging. The future of the #openweb—and, frankly, the planet—depends on it.

The Evolution of SocialHub

“the crew gathered around #SocialHub worked remarkably well for a while, organising good gathering, conferences and very useful outreach of #ActivityPub to the #EU that seeded much of the current #mainstreaming. But yes, it was always small and under utilised due to the strong forces of #stupidindividalisam that we need to balance. Ideas?“

From grassroots origins, #SocialHub emerged as a community-driven platform, rooted in the #openweb principles, focusing on the interplay of technology and “native” social paths. Its initial success lay in its collaborative ethos, free from mainstream interference. This promising start has since failed, due to lack of core consensuses and the active #blocking of any process to mediate this mess making.

Current challenges are from the influx of non-native perspectives, The twitter migrants and rapid #Fediverse expansion has diluted what was left of the original focus. Then in reaction to this the has been a retreat to tech paths over the social paths. This shift toward technical priorities has marginalized the social aspects that initially defined the community, this is a mirroring broader #geekproblem struggles that are core to the original failing.

What actually works is always grassroots messiness and constructive processes, that is messy in a good way, authentic, grassroots movements are inherently untidy, this ordered/chaos is where real social value is born. Attempts to overly structure or mainstream these paths risks losing their soul. Lifestyleism, and fragmented tribalism, distract from meaningful change. These behaviours breed from #stupidindividualism, a core product of the #deathcult culture that undermines collective action. There is a role for activism, based on learning from history to avoid repeating mistakes. This can lead to wider social engagement, and an embrace of messiness to counteract the stifling tendencies of rigid mainstreaming and isolated tech focus.

The metaphor of “shovels” is useful to turn the current pile of social and technical “shit” into compost is apt. Grassroots communities nurture a healthier ecosystem that balances tech and social. The imbalance favouring tech over social must be addressed. Reinvigorating the core social crew with a focus on community-oriented discussions and actions can restore equilibrium.

For this, it can be useful to challenge neoliberal narratives, use the #openweb/#closedweb framework to critique and dismantle neoliberal “common sense”. Highlight how these ideologies breed the individualistic and exploitative tendencies that undermine collective progress. The need for vigilance against co-option and the importance of nurturing the messy authenticity of grassroots movements. The path forward requires not just shovelling but planting seeds of collaboration, transparency, and collective action. By embracing the chaos and keeping the focus on social value, the #openweb can flourish as a genuine alternative to the #closedweb.

#KISS

Homo curator: towards the ethics of consumption

Book Launch Reflection: Homo Curator: Towards the Ethics of Consumption

The launch of Homo Curator: Towards the Ethics of Consumption, edited by Peter Rona, Laszlo Zsolnai, and Agnieszka Wincewicz-Price, brings fresh Dominican thinking into the pressing issues of consumerism and environmental collapse. This book is a product of the Las Casas Institute’s symposium on “The Ethics of Consumption” at Blackfriars Hall, University of Oxford. It engages deeply with the moral dimensions of consumption, critiquing the failures of modern economic theory and calling for ethical renewal.

The book explores two critical questions: the inherent human capacity for excess and wrongdoing, and the inability of mainstream economics to factor morality into its frameworks. The central critique is aimed at the language of maximization—an ethos that defines success as unending growth and consumption. Instead, the authors ask a fundamental question: what is enough?

Consumption and justice in today’s world, justice is intrinsically tied to the limits of our planet. The authors argue that economics is not a science in the analytic sense, but a descriptive tool that has strayed far from its moral purpose. As we face ecological collapse, the question of “enough” demands responsibility, judgment, and moral courage. This requires resisting the “iron cage of consumption” that defines modernity and rethinking our relationship with resources.

Temperance and the commons, the Dominican perspective shines here: take what you need, no more. Temperance, once a core virtue, is now subsumed by a culture of excess. The monetization of the commons—the transformation of shared resources into exchangeable commodities—has stripped nature of its intrinsic value. The result? A world where growth relentlessly encroaches upon the commons, leaving us with privatized, degraded ecosystems.

This critique of monetization calls for a radical reevaluation of the way we assign value. Economic systems built on perpetual growth cannot sustain a world of finite resources. Justice and sustainability require that we mediate compassion with responsibility, tempering individual desires for the sake of collective well-being.

Time, prudence, and addiction to the present, the book also delves into the mutilation of prudence by unbalanced rationality. Traditionally encompassing past, present, and future, prudence has been reduced to a myopic focus on immediate gratification. This short-term thinking fuels addiction to consumption, where future benefits are discounted, and irrational preferences dominate decision-making.

The addiction metaphor is powerful here. Like addicts, societies rationalize their destructive behaviours under the guise of “rational” self-interest, even when the long-term costs are catastrophic. The authors challenge this paradigm of irrationality, advocating for a return to prudence that considers the well-being of future generations.

Here the Christian thinking kicks in with moral renewal over structural reform, a criticism that while structural reforms are touted as solutions, the book argues they cannot succeed without a moral foundation. Real change requires a reawakening of ethical principles—justice, temperance, and responsibility. For this path without these, even the most revolutionary economic policies will fail to address the root causes of ecological and social crises.

Shovelling the mess, the themes of Homo Curator align with the challenges we face in building a sustainable and just future. The critique of consumption, monetization, and short-term thinking reflects the broader struggle to escape the “#deathcult” of #neoliberalism.

As I often say, our world is smeared in social and ecological “shit,” but shit makes good compost. By wielding these tools of justice, temperance, and prudence, we could maybe shovel this mess into something fertile. This Dominican vision dose offers not just critique but hope: a call to embrace moral responsibility as we plant the seeds of a new economy rooted in shared humanity and care for the planet.

It’s a reminder that we need more than technical fixes—we need ethical renewal. The work ahead is messy, but necessary. Grab a shovel.

Book launch for Homo Curator: Towards the Ethics of Consumption edited by Peter Rona, Laszlo Zsolnai, and Agnieszka Wincewicz-Price.

This book explores the under-researched sources of the consumerist culture and the environmental damage it has brought about. The book is an outcome of the symposium on “The Ethics of Consumption” organised and hosted by the Las Casas Institute at the Blackfriars Hall, University of Oxford as part of its Economics as a Moral Science Programme. It takes on two contemporary problems: the human weakness and capacity for wrong-doing, and the failure of modern economic theory to account for the moral character of human behaviour and its implicit encouragement of gluttonous life-styles. In a time when grand political schemes are proposed to revive sustainability of global economy, the authors of the papers collected in this book highlight the need for moral renewal without which the most revolutionary structural reforms are bound to fail at producing the desired outcome. Topics of the book include the meaning and sources of avarice, the attempt to define what is enough, exploration of philosophical and theological perspectives which can serve as building blocks for the ethics of consumption. This makes the book of great interest to a broad readership of economists, social scientists and philosophers.

————

That economics is not a science, rather it is descriptive rather than analytic. They are quite progressive, Franciscans in Oxford.

Criticism of the language of maximization, enough is the question.

Temperature, taking what you need, not more. Now the is the question of justice, due to the limits we now understand.

We have to take the responsibility for making judgments. To mediate the compation, in our money society, it’s hard work to counter this.

The iron cage of consumption, we need radical change in our economics to escape this.

Produce, the 3 ages of men, past, present future, its feald is time. Modern rationality, gives us mutilated “produnce” only the present.

Addiction, as rationale, they discount future benefits. A paradine of irrationality. Some preferences are irrational?

Monetisation is a core problem, commons are closed, growth is more and more inclosing the”commons” the environment becomes property. All nature is turned into exchange values.

The “social shit” story is raw, real, and relatable

The metaphor of “shit” as both the cause of decay and a potential source of renewal is provocative and insightful. It captures the essence of the challenge we face in addressing #mainstreaming culture, where conversations to often get stuck in defensive and rigid negative thinking.

Why social change online fails, is in part that terms are barriers, people cling to #mainstreaming “common sense” because it feels safe and familiar. Talking outside these norms triggers defensiveness, making constructive dialogue nearly impossible. This is amplified by post-modern relativism (on the left) and authoritarian rigidity (on the right), which block ideas and meaningful conversations.

The role of #BLOCKING, dismissing or shutting down alternative perspectives perpetuates the #techshit mess and reinforces #deathcult values. It stifles creativity and solutions by keeping discussions within narrow boundaries. Social shit as the status quo, both left, and right ideological contribute to the decay, creating a world smeared in “shit” where truth is either denied or imposed. This leads to stagnation, not growth.

The plan and the #4opens, focus on action, “just keep working” is pragmatic. By creating and demonstrating the value of #openweb tech like #OMN, we can sidestep unproductive arguments and focus on planting seeds of change. Turning shit into compost, the metaphor of composting is powerful. Social decay (shit) can be transformed into fertile ground for growth, but it requires tools (shovels) and effort. This aligns with need for grassroots action and collective responsibility.

Reframing conversations is core, to break through defensive and angry reactions. For this to work, maybe we need to start with shared values, frame discussions about universal concerns like community, fairness, and sustainability this could build common ground. To balance relatable language alongside the “truth” metaphors, which are both vivid and compelling, sometimes it’s good to simplify for audiences to draw people in. Focus on demonstration, not debate, showcasing working examples of #4opens tech and grassroots projects to inspire people to engage.

Planting flowers, the imagery of strong women and sensible men wielding shovels to compost the mess and plant flowers, is an optimistic vision. It emphasizes collective action and the potential for beauty to emerge from decay. The open invitation for collaboration is key, maintaining this openness, we can hold open space for those ready to step away from the pile and start helping with the shovelling.

The “social shit” story is raw, real, and relatable. It smells like the mess we’re in, but also hints at the possibility of transformation. The challenge lies in inspiring people to pick up the shovel and join in the composting work. Maybe with persistence, transparency, and focus on action, this work will catalyse meaningful change.

Keep planting seeds—some will bloom in unexpected ways. 🌱

The question, how do we bring more people into this space of stepping away and creating something better?

There is a deep frustration with #mainstreaming culture, with its strong tendency to elevate the wrong people and prioritize misguided actions. How can we “think better” beyond the traps of the current socio-political mess.

The scum rises, in #mainstreaming culture, those who conform to the system, rather than challenge it, often rise to the top. This creates a cycle where meaningful change is stifled by mediocrity and opportunism.
Grassroots value, social progress has historically emerged from the #grassroots. By stepping away from the toxic mainstream, we can refocus on nurturing these sources of real value.
The wrong thing gets done, funders and institutional forces often push agendas that diverge from grassroots needs, resulting in projects that perpetuate the status quo.
Paralysis of choice, the perceived lack of viable options (e.g., “you have no choice but to do the wrong thing”) leads to a sense of helplessness and frustration.

Thinking better, we need frameworks that reject the flawed foundations of #mainstreaming while building collective action. Let’s look at some broad outlines:

Anarchist paths focus on horizontal organization, mutual aid, and direct action.
Strengths: Empowers communities, resists hierarchy, and builds autonomy.
Weaknesses: Often struggles with long-term scalability and coordination.
Trotskyist/Stalinist paths centralized control with a focus on revolutionary goals and structural transformation.
Strengths: Can mobilize large-scale change and challenge systemic power structures.
Weaknesses: builds authoritarianism, co-option, and detachment from grassroots needs.
Liberal paths lead to incremental reforms within existing systems.
Strengths: Pragmatic and accessible, with a focus on policy and advocacy.
Weaknesses: Co-opted by #mainstreaming agendas, leading to superficial solutions.

The #4opens approach, is a permissionless path to sidestep these systemic failures. This approach aligns with anarchist values of autonomy while addressing their scalability challenges through structured openness and federation. Some practical steps to nurture grassroots power:

Step away from toxicity, recognize when systems and individuals perpetuate harm, and refocus energy on constructive grassroots work.

Muddle through together, embrace imperfection and collective experimentation. Mistakes are inevitable, but progress emerges from the process.

Push back against funders’ agendas, build alternative funding models (e.g., community support, cooperative economies) to reduce reliance on top-down directives.

Focus on trust networks, invest in relationships and trust-building at the grassroots level. Trust is the antidote to the cynicism of #mainstreaming.

Hold space for uncomfortable conversations, lean into the discomfort of challenging entrenched norms and assumptions within movements.

The challenge is a very real mess, we’re stuck in a cycle where “the wrong thing” gets done under pressure from flawed paths. Breaking free requires stepping away, nurturing #grassroots alternatives, and committing to frameworks like the #4opens that push more collective empowerment over individual gain and #mainstreaming institutional control.

For more of this there is a grump old sod working on the same things over here https://seizethemeans.communitarium.org/baslow/communitaria-what-we-need-to-do-i-think

The question, how do we bring more people into this space of stepping away and creating something better?