Why is Mastodon so dominant in the fediverse?

Q. Why is Mastodon so dominant in the fediverse?

A. It had better #UX and @Gargron running it was an effective communicator at #KISS and built it out as a project alongside a healthy (white) lie about security and privacy.
The rest of the projects lacked these things – #Pleroma the obverse compaine was ripped apart by the #geekproblem then embraced by the right-wing. #Peertube was stuck in a good but closed development for years. #Pixelfed is a little brother project to #mastodon. Then there are a whole flood of #NGO funded projects that have no community.

Might be useful to see it as we’re having a “KING” problem, then the rest are #feudalism all the way down. This should be easy to fix as its and all #openweb, but it’s not. Just about everyone is hard #BLOCKING the obvuse need for “democracy” as a path out of the mess #OGB

How is the #NOSTR world doing on this?

A path out of the funding mess

The is an unspoken negative effect of traditional foundation funding agendas on grassroots #openweb projects. These grassroots projects often have different priorities and goals than traditional organizations, and the formal processes used by existing #NGO projects, such as decidim.org and loomio.org, may not be well-suited for them.

#OMN team aims to address this issue by focusing on empowering communities through decentralized decision-making processes. Their experience and track record make them well-suited to carry out this mission.

If successful, the #OGB project could have a significant impact on the way communities make decisions in the future. By empowering grassroots movements and organizations, it could help to ensure that their voices are heard and that their needs are addressed.

A draft funding application – OGB

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

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

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

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

A Look at Existing Projects

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

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

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

 

We used to have a good grassroots #DIY media – SchNEWS

SchNEWS was a free weekly publication that focused on environmental and social issues/struggles in the UK and internationally. It emphasized direct action protest and autonomous political struggles outside formalized political parties. The publication was run by unpaid volunteers and was financially supported by donations from readers and subscribers rather than regular funding channels. Its strapline and motto were “information for action,” which aimed to provide readers with necessary information and contacts to become proactively involved in political issues.

SchNEWS started in 1994 in Brighton out of the campaign against the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 called Justice?. The newsletter was initially meant to act as a collective memory for the groups formed under the Justice? banner. It quickly built up a national readership, gaining popularity for presenting news in a concise, witty, and jargon-free language. It covered various social and environmental struggles in the UK and abroad, such as the protests against the building of the M11 motorway link road in London, the anti-Newbury bypass protests in Berkshire, and the actions of Reclaim the Streets. Later, it focused on more international issues such as neo-liberalism and the anti-war movement.

While the final editions of SchNEWS looked very similar to the initial issues – two sides of A4 crammed with text – its subject matter and readership transformed by the rise of the internet. In 2000, it joined Indymedia and other alternative media on the internet to reach an international audience, and the content broadened accordingly. SchNEWS was a non-commercial enterprise and carried no advertising. It relied on revenue from subscriptions, benefit gigs, and donations.

SchNEWS also produced short films called SchMOVIES, which were free to download. The website contains an archive of contact lists and back issues, as well as a repository for films and satirical graphics. The most well-used part of the site is the Party & Protest listings, covering demonstrations, events, meetings, screenings, benefit gigs, and festivals.

In September 2014, the team behind SchNEWS ended regular publication.

The #hashtags embody a story and world-view

My use of #hashtags is confusing a lot of people, good to have some signal in the noise on this subject https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypertext am using them in the way the #WWW was designed to use them #KISS

The #hashtags embody a story and world-view that are rooted in a progressive and critical perspective on technology and society. They highlight the negative impact of neoliberalism (#deathcult) and consumer capitalism (#fashernista) on society, and promote the original ideals of the World Wide Web and internet culture (#openweb). The #closedweb hashtag critiques the for-profit internet and its social consequences, while the promote the principles of transparency, collaboration, and sharing in open-source development.

The #geekproblem hashtag draws attention to the cultural movement of geeks, who can become blinded by their own technical knowledge and fail to consider the broader social implications of their work (#techshit). The #encryptionists hashtag critiques the dominant belief among some geeks that all solutions need more encryption, which can lead to a desire for total control and artificial scarcity.

Overall, these hashtags are interlocking and tell a wide-ranging story and world-view that advocates for a more humane, collaborative, and transparent approach to technology and society. The #nothingnew hashtag raises the question of whether new technological projects are needed, or whether we should focus on improving existing ones. The #techchurn hashtag refers to the technological outcome of the #geekproblem, which can lead to a constant cycle of new projects that do not address underlying social issues. Finally, the #OMN and #indymediaback hashtags promote the idea of an open media network and the rebooting of the altmedia project that was once the size of traditional media on the #openweb. The #OGB hashtag represents the need for open governance and the power of community to make decisions collectively.

People destroy things they love, not from hate, more from possession

The mess we make, people often destroy things they love, not from hate, more from possession. Let’s look at a few projects on this path to critique the fall short of potential due to a lack of connectivity and maturity

The distributed cooperative organisation project on https://anagora.org while it aims to provide organizational tools for cooperative, commons-oriented, and feminist economic forms, it lacks the necessary links and connections to be in any way truly effective.

  • http://disco.coop/manifesto/ This is the #fahernista view of the 20-year-old #OMN project, it is full of teenage focus and might be interesting if it LINKED, but it does not, flight and scatter to the wind, more to compost.

The #DisCO (Distributed Cooperative Organisations) manifesto at disco.coop is the same project run by #fahernistas

The COMPOST digital magazine (two.compost.digital) is also in similar terms, #NGO and #fahernista path, with no affective linking.

These projects are all #blocking by occupying space. In the #fahernista path, it’s good to see how possessiveness leads to unintended destruction of things we cherish. This reflects a common path of human nature, where love and possession become intertwined, with negative consequences.

“Flight and scatter to the wind, more to compost” these projects, despite their intentions, ultimately dissipate or break down without achieving any goals. The use of “compost” as a metaphor that suggests that in their failure, these projects might contribute to future growth or development in unexpected ways. The hashtag “#blocking” is a call to prevent or resist these ineffective approaches.

Our “common sense” paths are often bad:

This path of possession can early lead to bad paths in alt organising. Abuse of power, when leadership positions within a cooperative become possessive of their authority, this can lead to corrupt practices and mismanagement, misappropriation of resources, even fraud. The desire to maintain control and cover up misdeeds leads to the destruction of records and falsification of information. Erosion of cooperative principles grow when peoples interests overshadow collective goals, this can destroy the ethos of cooperation. Then trying to fix this becomes much harder with resistance to transparency, and over control of information. This all leads naturally to conflict and retaliation, destructive actions against those who challenge them.

How possessiveness in different forms undermines the collaborative nature of cooperatives, leading to the destruction of trust, resources, and the organisation’s integrity.

You are making a mess of social technology

From my prospective, a lot of people are being prats on social/technology. This should be obvuse statement, but it’s not. If you think about this we can take two paths, the first is to #block this, obviously making more pratish behaver. The second is to ask questions and grow, thus reducing pratish behaver. In this era of #stupidindividualism which path do you think people take, and yes they ARE oftern being prats on this 😉 Get off your knees comes to mind, and please be less of a prat.

The last 40 years of worshipping the #deathcult (#neoliberalism salted with #postmodernism poisoned our communities by making individualism toxic. I am all for freedom, that people can be stupid if they want to be, but I keep using my freedom to tell them that this is often pratish behaver that is toxic and self-destructive. It’s up to them if they want to act on this communication, and yes, the #stupidindividualism thing to do is to #block this communication.

In this, it’s up to YOU to get off your knees, to stop worshipping the #deathcult (neoliberalism salted with postmodernism) and to look up to see you are making a mess of social technology.

#SSB splintering a “commons”

Another link that is pure #geekproblem but interesting for #OMN in that #SSB is splintering https://www.manyver.se/blog/2023-04-05

@rabble is involved in another splinter #nosta

How protocols die… #SSB was a protocol that they all reallyed round, a “commons”, we now have 3 “commons” on the table. The rabble one which has hidden #VC money behind it, then this individualist one https://www.manyver.se/blog/2023-04-05 which will maybe rally the grassroots, and the original #SSB which might or might not carry on.

We don’t have a cross culture “common” any more. A clean separation of the #mainstreaming and the #grassroots. To make this relevant, the same is likely going to happen to #ActivertyPub when the #W3C “formal consensuses” is captured by the #dotcons

The enclosure of commons is always a bad path. And yes not saying #SSB was a good protocol it was not, it came from the encryptionsists, but it was a rare “commons”.

#AP is a good/bad protocol, we don’t need to do the same path. Thus, the message to #socialhub, 95% chance they will ignore it or more likely see it as weakness and attack harder, cats…

“The is currently an undeclared battle going on between the rebooted #WC3 and the grassroots (#fashernista dominated) #socialhub for power. If the libertarian cats can’t herd themselves to do something useful, like we managed with the #EU outreach – currently they cannot do this, have a feeling socialhub will lose.

Not a big problem, but a dangerous outcome for #ActivityPub as #WC3 is formal consensus which is easy to capture and control for the #dotcons – where socialhub libertarian cats have failed messy consensuses so less open to capture.

But from my view the libertarian cats are being prats as cats are… so WC3 is stepping back in to CONTROL… how to herd cats – should I try? Or keep focus on #OMN codeing is a question am asking my self?

@xxx @xxx@xxx, have tried building bridges, but no foundation stones laid on this building work. Honest question are we helping or hindering in this grassroots space?”

There is a small chance they act, we did herd cats on #socialhub for the #EU outreach. This is why I bring it up, though, think people can only see the power politics and not what am saying when doing this. Agen 5% chance of a good outcome…

Maybe this helps to make the “mess” metaphor clearer. For the #geekproblem they likely have no idea about the damage they do. Because in their terms they are mostly right. Step back to look at the wider picture, and it’s obviously adding to the mess to be composed.

The #geekproblem

Storeys of our tech http://hamishcampbell.com/2023/04/05/ssb-splintering-a-commons/ a post that give background on #SSB and its splintering as an example.

Why this matters, the #openweb is the most powerful tool for change/challenge. The mess we are in The moral depravity of virtue signalling solidarity at this time of mass murder – Roger Hallam The moral depravity of virtue signalling solidarity at this time of mass murder

 

A native path out of the mess people make on the #openweb

The Open Governance Body (#OGB) describes a permissionless process/structure that is open and allows the group that forms using the tools to decide who is a part of the group or not. This process can divide into a web of connecting instances of governance as a natural human process of group formation. The #OGB emphasizes that there is no exclusion and always diversity, making it a natural fit for the #fediverse.

The #OGB also shows that if people are stupid and focused on individualism, each governance instance will have one member and no power. To gain power, people have to work together, which is built into the code. The #OGB emphasizes that hoarding power is limited, and it flows through the community, energizing and solidifying the community and building horizontal power to challenge/change vertical power.

The #OGB focus is on the importance of keeping things simple (#KISS) and that some people will try to push for existing power structures before democracy. However, as the process is permissionless, it is not possible to stop them from doing this. The #OGB emphasizes the need to do better, and that being native to the #fediverse is a big help in this regard.

The #OGB emphasizes the importance of recognizing where power comes from in the context of the #fediverse. The fediverse operates differently from corporations, governments, courts, and police, and it is important to think and build with this difference rather than trying to drag the fediverse back to the #mainstreaming path.

The #OGB builds from the #fediverse works because it is different, and it is easy to forget this important thing when #mainstreaming agendas grab and hold. The #OGB suggests that the missing question in almost all conversations is “who are we empowering,” and emphasizes the need to do better in alt-tech.

The #OGB notes that there are problems in alt-tech and suggests that starting with the would remove 90% of the mess, revealing the real potential for good outcomes. The #OGB highlights that doing better in alt-tech would involve using shovels to make compost and planting seeds of the world we want to see.

The #OGB describes the process scaffolding for the governance body as a default effect, where the decisions on how things work will be up to the members of the body. The power of the governance body is only the power of default, and the #OGB is about removing all hard default choices and building in a small number of KISS tools, then letting the body members work out themselves how to use them.

The #OGB uses the example of #Couchsurfing, where the website redesign removed the #DIY tools active Couchsurfers had used to self-organize, leading to disappointment among members. The #OGB argues that letting members make their own process, open vs. closed, is necessary to overcome the #geekproblem and have hope for alt-tech.

The #OGB builds governance with the way, rules, norms, and actions are structured, sustained, regulated, and held accountable. this is to mediate that the #Fediverse currently has a “herding cats” governance, denoting a futile attempt to control or organize a class of entities that are inherently uncontrollable.

The #OGB codebase is not just a tool for the #Fediverse, but it can be used to democratically run any structures that have stakeholders.

The #OGB provides an example of how the codebase can be used to run a local street market, with each stallholder as a stakeholder, people who shop at the market as users, and the local council, events company, and shop owner’s association as affiliate groups. The #OGB approach and codebase will scale sideways, with street markets governed city-wide, and each of the markets becoming a stakeholder, users as users, and city-wide orgs and groups as affiliate groups.

The #OGB shaping of the “body” comes from a long history/experience of horizontal activism, where “those who do the work have more say.” noisebridge.net/wiki/Do-ocracy

The #OGB pushes that the bulk of the voice comes from those who run the #Fediverse, the people who run/support the instances. The people who build the tools also get a say, as do support orgs and events, and the users who will be spread widely get a say, but their power is diluted by the much larger numbers involved.

This working practice comes from 30 years of building from The Tyranny of Structureless tick box list https://unite.openworlds.info/Open-Media-Network/openwebgovernancebody/wiki/03.-The-Tyranny-of-Stucturelessness That code being quite “anti-human” is an interesting challenge, and it’s important to figure out how to get the humane “mess” in a coding process that is based on being “exact” and in control #OGB

The #OGB project is grounded in lived experience, and it’s a way out of this mess. We cannot keep using traditional institutions. We have to stop the #techcurn if we are going to use #openweb tech for social/ecological change/challenge, and we need to think about this now.

The #OGB project is about developing better ways of having “trust” based conversations and “trust” based “governance” in the #openweb. The project is built from hundreds of years of on the ground organizing that has shaped every “freedom” we enjoy and is done in a #KISS approach. The #OGB is a #fedivers native way of working, NOT a #mainstreaming way, and it comes from directly working, setting up, and solving recurring problems at hundreds of direct action protest camps.

The #OGB focus on what we know works, as at the moment, almost nothing works for social good. The #OGB project is what is needed, a voluntary cooperative and collaborative alliance that is native to the #fediverse.

The thinking is that we need to put a stop to the #techchurn as we have piles of #techshit already to compost, that #nothingnew is a hashtag for this.

It’s not the goal of the #OGB project to create an organization that tells everyone what protocols and standards to use in the #fediverse. The #OGB project is about developing better ways of having good “trust” based conversations and “trust” based “governance” in the #openweb

To sum up, the current working models of “governance” in open-source projects are monarchy, aristocracy and oligarchy. This is the rock star developer, the coders and the funders. It should be obverse to anyone that 99.99% of people are missing from this feudalistic ideal of “governance”.

Democracy is the basic foundation of our shared modernity.

WHY DO WE PUT UP WITH THIS MESS IN TECH?

Let’s take a different path, please #OGB

Q. that is an optimistic projection

A. I have no illusion that the normal shitty behaver of fucking people over and being a prat will happen, but the codebase is designed to mediate this crap behaver for better outcomes 🙂

#OGB “permissionless” is an important word that needs some thought. The body is made up of three different, balanced groups: stakeholders, users, and affiliate stakeholders. Anybody can become a stakeholder by setting up and running an active instance, and users are self-explanatory. That affiliate stakeholders are a little more complex and are treated differently, and it’s up to the body itself to decide if they play an active and useful role.

That nothing in this is top-down, elitist, discriminatory, or undemocratic, and it’s #KISS and looks safe to the “normal world” while being native to the #fediverse and its roots. All the coding is , based on #activertypub.

With #OGB, it’s important not to get lost in the #processgeeks and their dogmatic love of #formalconsensus, as that’s a dead end and has been for the 30 years of activism and coding tech. It’s important to keep the #OGB both #KISS and human, understandable. The #OGB is native “governance” and federates in the same way as the projects it “governs”. That this approach is counterintuitive to mainstream ideas and “common sense,” but that’s not necessarily a bad thing.

This approach has worked to some extent, as seen in the “#Fediverse” as a living example, working to scale small to bigger. There will be lots of “smoke,” and help is needed to keep the project clear of this mess. We have to overcome our #stupidindividualism to have a hope of a better world.

#OGB To remind you that the need for “governance” came out of a practical problem where the #activitypub community is made up of “cats” who were doing seminars outreach to powerful #EU Eurocrats on why they should be interested in #activertypub. #OGB is designed to be messy and not tidy, and it’s a “governance” of a disorganization, not a traditional power structure. “governance” can cooperate with more formal models of governance like traditional cooperatives.

The visionontv project has been runing for over ten years

The #visionontv project has been running for over ten years. It is a grassroots media project that aims to provide an alternative to mainstream media by creating and distributing independent video content. It is based on the principles of openness, collaboration, and decentralization. The project uses open-source software and decentralized platforms to create and distribute activist video content. Emphasizes the importance of grassroots community-driven media, where individuals and groups can create and share their own content.

One of the key features of the #visionontv project is its is a part of the Open Media Network (OMN), a decentralized network of media sites that share content and promote independent media that is not controlled by any single entity.

http://visionon.tv

 

 

The #OMN Modding Process

The #OMN Modding Process

The #OMN instances have been running for the last 5 years with an open modding process.

Users can become mods after being around for a bit.

The modding process is based on a clear #KISS project statement, with a “don’t be a dick” rider on the end.

If an account is drive-by SPAM/obtusely a troll/right wing, it is removed as the #OMN is a progressive radical media project.

If a normal user or unsure, a warning is given first, followed by a discussion as long as it is polite. If the user continues to break the statement/act like a dick, they are kicked out.

Escalating silencing is not found to be worthwhile for good outcomes.

If the user repeats being a dick/breaking the statement, they are banned. A rough mod consensus is reached before banning if they are a USER rather than a drive-by.

Users can appeal to the mods, who may or may not listen. They are free to set up an account elsewhere on the #Fediverse.

Conclusion: The #OMN example shows how modding can work in a horizontal/federated network, based on clear principles and open processes.

We need to think different #OGB

The challenges of establishing a governance model for the #fedivers, which is a network of many stakeholders. Traditional open-source model of a benign king is not an option for the #fedivers, as there is no consensus among stakeholders for this approach.

The #fedivers is currently a loose network with few strong points of power, which is not necessarily a bad thing. However, as the #fedivers continues to grow, this will inevitably change, and there is a choice to be made about whether to adopt an open or closed model of change.

I argue that the idea of a formal board structure is naive, as it is prone to power politics and corporate capture. Instead, I suggest doing something different, such as building a governance model with dancing elephants and paper planes. This is a metaphor for a more creative and collaborative approach to governance that values the contributions of all stakeholders.

#activertypub represents a new and innovative approach to governance in the #fedivers, one that values the contributions of all stakeholders and avoids the pitfalls of traditional power politics. We need to think different and have a project doing this https://unite.openworlds.info/Open-Media-Network/openwebgovernancebody