Categories
Non classé

Building Trust in the Openweb and the Fediverse

In the vast landscape of the #openweb and the emerging #Fediverse, trust is the currency that underpins meaningful interactions and collaborations. Yet, amidst the cacophony of voices and divergent perspectives, building trust can feel like navigating a minefield. In this post, we’ll explore the importance of trust in the #openweb and the Fediverse, examine the challenges to building trust, and propose strategies to foster a culture of trust within these communities.

Trust is the bedrock upon which communities thrive, enabling people to engage in meaningful exchanges, share resources, and collaborate on common goals. In the decentralized ecosystem of diverse voices converge and interact, trust becomes more essential. Unlike centralized #dotcons platforms, where trust is bestowed upon a single authority, the “native” openweb relies on distributed networks of trust relationships between people and communities.

However, despite the inherent value of trust, the landscape of is fraught with challenges that hinder this cultivation. One of the primary obstacles is the prevalence of #blocking and resistance to new ideas or approaches. While blocking may be necessary in certain circumstances, such as to protect against harmful actors or preserve the integrity of a community, it can also impede constructive dialogue and collaboration. Without trust, communities become fragmented and isolated.

To address these challenges and foster a culture of trust several strategies can be employed:

  1. Transparency: Transparency is key to building trust within communities. Open and honest communication about intentions, decisions, and actions fosters a sense of accountability and reliability. Projects and individuals should strive to be transparent in their operations, sharing information openly and engaging in dialogue with stakeholders.
  2. Inclusivity: Inclusive communities are more likely to cultivate trust among their members. By seeking out diverse perspectives and voices, and creating spaces where people feel welcome and valued, communities can foster a sense of belonging and trust. Inclusivity also involves addressing power imbalances and amplifying silent voices.
  3. Consistency: Consistency in actions and behavior is essential for building trust over time. Communities should strive to uphold their commitments, follow through on promises, and maintain integrity in their interactions. Consistency breeds reliability and reliability breeds trust.
  4. Empathy: Empathy is the foundation of trust in human relationships. By empathizing with the experiences and perspectives of others, communities can build mutual understanding and respect. Empathy involves active listening, acknowledging the feelings and concerns of others, and responding with compassion and kindness.
  5. Collaboration: Collaboration fosters trust by creating opportunities for people to work together towards common goals. By engaging in collaborative projects, sharing resources, and supporting each other’s efforts, communities can build bonds of trust and solidarity.

In conclusion, trust is the cornerstone of a thriving #openweb and the building of the #fediverse community. By prioritizing transparency, inclusivity, consistency, empathy, and collaboration, communities can create environments where trust flourishes, enabling people to engage in meaningful interactions and collaborations. Remember that trust is not a destination but a journey—one that requires ongoing effort, dialogue, and commitment from all stakeholders.

Categories
Non classé

The mess we have made in tech

The last 40 years of technological development and its impact on society, coupled with the growing urgency of addressing #climatechange, highlight the need to fundamentally change the way we approach technology. Here are some key points:

  1. Environmental Impact: The rapid growth of technology over the past few decades has come with a significant environmental cost. From the production and disposal of electronic devices to the energy consumption of data centers and digital infrastructure, the tech industry has contributed to greenhouse gas emissions, resource depletion, and environmental degradation. As we face the reality of #climatechaos, there’s a pressing need to develop and adopt technologies that minimize harm to the planet.
  2. Social Inequality: While technology has the potential to connect people and empower communities, our embrace of the #dotcons has exacerbated social inequalities. Access to digital technologies, information, and opportunities, widening the gap between the privileged and marginalized. Moreover, #dotcons tech platforms have been criticized for perpetuating discrimination, bias, and exclusion, further entrenching systemic injustices. Addressing these issues requires building “native” #openweb technology that prioritizes equity, inclusivity, and social justice.
  3. Corporate Control and Surveillance: The dominance of large tech corporations raised concerns about corporate power. These companies wield immense influence over digital ecosystems, shaping the flow of information, controlling social access to platforms, and monetizing people’s data and metadata. To counteract corporate control and protect the #openweb, there’s a need for decentralized, community-driven alternatives that prioritize people and community.
  4. Innovation and Collaboration: The current paradigm of technological development prioritizes profit-driven innovation over basic social and environmental responsibility. This mindset stifles collaboration, stifles open innovation, and limits the potential for collective problem-solving. To address complex challenges like #climatechange, we need to foster a culture of collaboration, knowledge sharing, and open-source development. By democratizing access to technology and promoting participatory design processes, we can harness the collective intelligence and creativity of diverse communities to drive positive change.
  5. Political and Cultural Shifts: The intersection of technology, politics, and culture shapes societal norms, values, and behaviours. Over the past few years, we’ve seen a growing awareness of the political implications of technology, from concerns about online disinformation and algorithmic bias to debates over platform governance and digital rights. As grassroots movements like Extinction Rebellion (#XR) mobilize to address #climatechange, there’s an opportunity to leverage technology as a tool for social and environmental activism. By challenging mainstream narratives, engaging in grassroots #openweb organizing, and amplifying community based voices, we can harness technology to advance progressive causes and catalyse the needed systemic change and challenge.

In summary, the challenges posed by #climatechaos necessitate a radical reimagining of technology and its role in society. By prioritizing sustainability, equity, collaboration, and activism, we can build a resilient and inclusive #openweb future that serves the needs of people and the planet. This shift requires challenging entrenched power dynamics, confronting corporate interests, and mobilizing collective action to create a more just and sustainable world.

Categories
Non classé

The mess we made with the dotcons

An example of this is the evolution of the #dotcons #Twitter from a neoliberal space to one with fascist tendencies under Elon Musk’s serves as a stark reminder of the pitfalls of unchecked corporate power and the susceptibility of #dotcons platforms to authoritarian control. Also, there are broader lessons in the behaviour of people within these systems.

One key takeaway is the complicity of #neoliberal actors in facilitating the rise of fascism. #Neoliberalism, with its emphasis on deregulation and market-driven solutions, pushes for the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a few. This concentration eventually leads to the erosion of democratic norms and the rise of authoritarianism, as seen in the case of Twitter’s transformation. Thus, the intertwining of neoliberalism and fascism underscores the need for vigilance in combating both economic inequality and the erosion of “native” #openweb democratic projects.

Moreover, the reaction of neoliberal peoples “common sense” to the shift towards fascism on the #dotcons like Twitter is instructive. Despite the platform’s descent into authoritarianism, many #mainstreaming users continue to engage with it, clinging to nostalgia for its earlier, more liberal incarnation. This phenomenon highlights the tendency of #mainstreaming to adapt to life under oppressive regimes, often out of a desire for self-preservation or a misguided sense of normalcy. It serves as a sobering reminder of the dangers of complacency and the importance of resisting authoritarianism, aspesherly in its early stages.

In essence, the transformation of Twitter from a neoliberal to a fascist space underscores the interconnectedness of economic and political systems and the need for collective action to safeguard “native” #openweb democratic values. By recognizing the warning signs of authoritarianism and refusing to acquiesce to its normalization, people can help prevent the further erosion of the #openweb

The #dotcons and #closedweb of the last 20 years have been characterized by significant problems:

  1. Centralization of Power: The dominant platforms in the #dotcons era and #closedweb are centralized, controlled by a handful of corporations.
  2. Monopolistic Practices: The dominance of a few major players in the #dotcons led to monopolistic practices that stifled “native” #openweb culture. These monopolies limited people choice and hindered the development of alternative platforms that could offer more diverse and community-centric life.
  3. Surveillance Capitalism: The #dotcons relies on business models built around surveillance capitalism, where data and metadata is harvested, monetized, and exploited for targeted advertising and social purposes without consent and transparency. This exploitation of user data undermined “society” and created significant ethical concerns.
  4. Filter Bubbles and Echo Chambers: The algorithms employed by #dotcons are designed to prioritize content based on user engagement metrics, leading to the formation of filter bubbles and echo chambers. These algorithms push people to beliefs and preferences that limit exposure to diverse perspectives and contributing to polarization and disinformation.
  5. Erosion of Public Discourse: The rise of social media platforms in the #dotcons facilitated the spread of misinformation, hate speech, and extremist ideologies. These platforms prioritized engagement and virality over the quality and accuracy of content, leading to the erosion of public discourse and trust in media.
  6. Data Concerns: The collection and exploitation of user data by #dotcons raised significant #closeddata concerns. People have limited control over their social data and metadata.
  7. Digital Divide: Access to the internet and digital technologies remained unevenly distributed during the #closedweb era, exacerbating social and economic inequalities. Marginalized communities, faced barriers to access the #openweb, limiting their ability to participate in the digital economy and society.

Overall, the dominance of centralized platforms, surveillance capitalism, algorithmic biases, erosion of social norms, and inequalities have been some of the most pressing issues associated with the #dotcons and #closedweb over the last two decades. Addressing these challenges requires concerted efforts to promote decentralization, and “native” #openweb infrastructure and thinking and working on projects like #OMN #OGB #makinghistory and #indymediaback

This post is a reaction https://mastodon.ar.al/@aral/112098724636424845

Categories
Non classé

We can work towards a future

The discussion surrounding the classification of different versions of the web, such as #Web01, #Web02, #Web03, #Web04, or #Web05, is not merely an academic exercise but an aspect of understanding the evolving nature of the digital landscape. However, the proliferation of these hashtags can lead to confusion and contribute to the spread of fear, uncertainty, and doubt (FUD) among users.

In response to this confusion, the hashtags #openweb and #closedweb offer a clear and concise way to delineate between platforms that embrace openness, transparency, and community control (#openweb) and those that prioritize proprietary technology, centralized control, and lack transparency (#closedweb). By using these hashtags, we can foster a better understanding of the ideological and technical underpinnings of different web platforms.

Projects like #indymediaback and #OMN exemplify grassroots efforts to promote decentralized, community-controlled media and communication platforms. These initiatives are vital in challenging the dominance of large corporations in shaping the digital landscape and in advocating for a more inclusive, diverse, and community-controlled approach to technology development.

At the heart of this discussion lies the #geekproblem, which refers to the tendency among technologically inclined people to prioritize technical solutions without considering their broader societal implications or the needs of ordinary people. By recognizing the #geekproblem, we can begin to address the inherent biases and limitations of tech-centric approaches to problem-solving and advocate for solutions that are more inclusive and community-driven.

The solution to this problem lies in developing social tech that transcends the #geekproblem and focuses on the needs and perspectives of the community. This entails involving a diverse group of people in the development and decision-making process and promoting open-source code, open standards, open governance, and open data in technology development. By embracing these principles, we can create a more equitable, transparent, and collaborative digital ecosystem.

However, achieving this vision requires overcoming challenges, including the resistance of the status quo and the fear of change. By actively using the #4opens—open participation, decentralization, transparency, and interoperability—we can challenge the prevailing narrative, call out pointless technologies, and compost the #techshit that contributes to the perpetuation of harmful social dynamics.

Moreover, it is essential to recognize that the struggle for a more equitable and sustainable future is inherently political. The dominance of large corporations and the perpetuation of #neoliberal ideologies pose significant barriers to progress. Therefore, it is imperative to mobilize collective action and advocate for policies and initiatives that prioritize the needs and well-being of communities over profit-driven interests.

In conclusion, the use of hashtags such as #openweb, #closedweb, and serves as a powerful tool for organizing and mobilizing grassroots efforts to challenge the status quo. By embracing these hashtags and the values they represent, we can work towards a future where technology serves the interests of the many rather than the few.

Categories
Non classé

A balanced and pragmatic approach to native #openweb security

Challenging the Universal Mandate of SSL: A Critique from the #OpenWeb

In the digital landscape, the ubiquitous presence of #SSL encryption, while undoubtedly enhancing security, raises questions about its compatibility with the ethos of the #OpenWeb. The prevailing narrative around SSL often overlooks its ideological underpinnings and the broader implications of its universal adoption. This article aims to challenge the hegemony of SSL by highlighting its limitations and proposing a more nuanced approach to internet security rooted in the principles of accessibility, decentralization, and community empowerment.

At the heart of the issue lies the distinction between the #OpenWeb and the #ClosedWeb, represented respectively by the ethos of accessibility and decentralization, and the closed-off, centralized nature web. While SSL undoubtedly offers security benefits, its imposition on all online interactions reflects not only technical considerations but also ideological stances. The insistence on universal SSL usage is symptomatic of what we term the #GeekProblem—an inclination among technologically inclined people to prioritize technical solutions without consideration of their broader societal implications or the needs of ordinary people.

The universal mandate of SSL, championed by tech giants like Google, not only introduces complexities and barriers for ordinary users but also contributes to the centralization of internet infrastructure. Let’s Encrypt, an American NGO and a dominant SSL certification authority, epitomizes this centralization, posing a significant risk of a single point of failure. If compromised, Let’s Encrypt could undermine the security of countless websites and services, highlighting the dangers of relying on centralized authorities for internet security.

Moreover, the imposition of SSL as a default requirement creates hurdles for community-run platforms and DIY enthusiasts seeking to establish their presence on the #OpenWeb. The technical intricacies involved in obtaining, installing, and maintaining SSL certificates can be daunting for non-experts, leading to barriers to entry and discouraging participation in the vibrant ecosystem of the #OpenWeb.

Critically examining the motivations behind the push for universal SSL adoption reveals a fear-based agenda rooted in a conservative ideology of control. By framing SSL as a tool to be judiciously used rather than universally mandated, challenges the prevailing narrative surrounding internet security and advocate for a more balanced and pragmatic approach. Embracing the principles—open participation, decentralization, transparency, and interoperability—offers a pathway to internet security that prioritizes accessibility, decentralization, and community autonomy.

In conclusion, the universal mandate of SSL represents not only a technical solution to security but also an ideological stance that warrants critical examination. By advocating for a more balanced and user-friendly approach rooted in the principles of the #OpenWeb, we can foster a digital landscape that empowers communities, fosters innovation, and safeguards social freedoms. It’s time to rethink the role of SSL in the #OpenWeb and embrace a more inclusive and decentralized vision of internet “trust” based security.

Categories
Uncategorized

Composting the mess with the #OMN

The proliferation of technology has revolutionized the way we live, work, and communicate. However, as we dive deeper into the digital age, we are increasingly confronted with the alarming consequences of our reliance on these technologies. The links shed light on the issue of “digital” waste and its detrimental impact on the environment.

Gerry McGovern’s article “World Wide Waste” delves into the staggering amount of energy consumed by digital technologies, from data centres to our personal devices. He emphasizes the urgent need to address this issue and advocates for more sustainable practices in the digital realm. https://gerrymcgovern.com/world-wide-waste/

Similarly, the research conducted by Loughborough University’s Volume project highlights the environmental consequences of digital waste, particularly in terms of energy consumption and carbon emissions. The article underscores the importance of adopting eco-friendly approaches to digital design and usage. https://volume.lboro.ac.uk/digital-waste-polluting-the-planet/

Furthermore, the conversation around “dark data” and its contribution to environmental degradation further underscores the need for digital decarbonization. The Guardian’s report on the hidden costs of Ireland’s data center boom reveals the environmental toll of data storage and processing facilities, urging for greater accountability and regulation in the industry.  https://theconversation.com/dark-data-is-killing-the-planet-we-need-digital-decarbonisation-190423

In response to these pressing concerns, initiatives like Digital Decarb aim to promote sustainable practices in the digital sphere, advocating for reduced energy consumption and carbon emissions. https://digitaldecarb.org/

In contrast to the prevailing trend of digital overconsumption and waste, the #OMN (Open Media Networking) project presents a refreshing approach to digital technology. Unlike platforms driven by personalization and distraction, #OMN prioritizes community engagement and meaningful interaction. Its core mission revolves around building tools for communal use rather than individual gratification.

This ethos stands in stark contrast to the #mainstreaming of social tech, which at its core prioritizes personalization and profit over community well-being. By focusing on politics as inherently human rather than as a commodity, #OMN seeks to empower people to reclaim control over their (digital) lives and foster genuine connections within their communities and wider society.

However, effectively communicating this message to mainstream audiences remains a challenge. The prevailing narrative around digital technology often overlooks its environmental and social impact, instead emphasizing convenience and innovation. Breaking through this mindset requires not just words, but tangible actions and demonstrations of the #OMN’s principles in practice.

In essence, #OMN, along with initiatives like and #OGB, serve as tools for social change, enabling communities to shape their digital environments according to “native #openweb values and needs. Through collaborative efforts and grassroots activism, we can challenge the status quo and build a sustainable and equitable future.

Ultimately, the journey towards digital sustainability requires a collective commitment to reimagining the role of technology in our lives and prioritizing the well-being of our planet and communities above all else. The #OMN project invites people to join this endeavour, not just through words, but through meaningful action and collaboration. Together, we can harness the power of technology for the greater good and pave the way for a more inclusive and sustainable online and offline world.

Categories
Uncategorized

Digital waste – shouting into the void

Interesting links on “digital” waste https://gerrymcgovern.com/world-wide-waste/
https://volume.lboro.ac.uk/digital-waste-polluting-the-planet/
https://theconversation.com/dark-data-is-killing-the-planet-we-need-digital-decarbonisation-190423
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/15/power-grab-hidden-costs-of-ireland-datacentre-boom
https://digitaldecarb.org/

This is true. With the #OMN we are building tools for use, not for distraction, shouting into the void is not the project. Community, talking to community, is the core mission. The “personal” is not a part of our core project.

This is alien to #mainstreaming common sense in social tech. Politics as human not as other, we need the tools and the use to build the everyday of our lives #DIY

How to actually communicate this to the #mainstreaming is the challenge that is  very hard to bridge. This is actually impossible, so agen our plan is to build it and communicate by doing, not by just talking.

We are looking for a crew to build and do,” talking” is the tool to create this crew #DIY it’s not the tool itself for change and challenge.

#OMN #OGB #makinghistory are shovels (tools) for social use.

Categories
Uncategorized

The #4opens framework provides a useful lens through which to evaluate and assess technology projects

The path we need to take in technology is social is rooted in the recognition that technology, at its core, is a tool created and used by humans to address social needs and challenges. While technological advancements have the potential to bring about benefits and progress, they also have the capacity to perpetuate existing inequalities, exacerbate social divides, and undermine democratic principles.

The framework provides a useful lens through which to evaluate and assess technology projects, particularly those within the realms of the #openweb and #dotcons. By emphasizing openness, transparency, collaboration, and decentralization, the offer a set of guiding principles that prioritize social utility and collective benefit over corporate profit or individual gain.

Here’s why the social dimension of technology is crucial:

* Empowerment: Technology has the power to empower people and communities by providing access to information, resources, and opportunities. By focusing on the social utility of technology, we can ensure that it is designed and deployed in ways that promote inclusivity, participation, and empowerment for all.

* Equity and Justice: In a world characterized by systemic inequalities, technology can either reinforce existing power structures or serve as a tool for challenging and transforming them. By centering social considerations in tech development, we can work towards creating more equitable and just societies.

* Community Building: Technology has the potential to foster connections, collaboration, and community-building on a global scale. By prioritizing social utility, we can harness the power of technology to strengthen social bonds, facilitate dialogue, and mobilize collective action around shared goals and values.

* Sustainability: In an era of environmental crisis and resource depletion, it is essential to consider the social and environmental impacts of technology. By prioritizing sustainability and social responsibility in tech design and deployment, we can work towards creating systems and solutions that are environmentally sound and socially responsible.

In summary, the social dimension of technology is crucial because it determines how technology is designed, deployed, and used to address social needs and challenges. By embracing principles of openness, transparency, collaboration, and decentralization, we can ensure that technology serves the collective good and contributes to building a more sustainable future for us all.

Categories
Uncategorized

Funding Application: Building the Open Media Network

Funding Application: Building the Open Media Network

Project Overview: The Open Media Network (#OMN) is an innovative project aiming to construct a trust-based, human-moderated, and decentralized database shared across multiple peers, encompassing both peer-to-peer (p2p) and server-based architecture. OMN is centred around the principles, emphasizing openness, transparency, collaboration, and decentralized control. The project’s primary focus lies in utilizing technology to empower human networks and foster community-driven content curation and dissemination.

Key Functions: OMN boasts five primary functions:

  1. Publish: Users can easily publish various types of content, including text, images, and links, to a stream of objects.
  2. Subscribe: Users have the ability to subscribe to streams of objects from people, organizations, pages, groups, hashtags, and more, enabling custom content flows.
  3. Moderate: The platform integrates moderation tools from the #Fediverse, allowing users to express their preferences (e.g., like/dislike) on streams or objects, as well as provide comments.
  4. Rollback: Users, admins can remove untrusted historical content from their flow or instance database by publishing flow/source/tag, ensuring the integrity of the content.
  5. Edit: Users have the flexibility to edit the metadata of objects and streams across various sites, instances, or apps where they have login credentials.

Project Scope: The back-end infrastructure of OMN serves as the foundation for constructing a #DIY, trust-based, grassroots semantic web. The technology, affectionately referred to as the #WitchesCauldron, is designed to facilitate decentralized publishing, content aggregation, curation, and distribution while prioritizing user trust and community building. The front-end applications of OMN are diverse and adaptable, ranging from regional/city/subject-based #indymedia sites to distributed archiving projects like #makeinghistory.

Funding Needs: To realize the vision of the Open Media Network, we require funding support to cover essential expenses such as:

  1. Development: Hiring skilled developers to build and refine the back-end infrastructure and associated tools, ensuring robustness, scalability, and interoperability.
  2. Moderation Tools: Integrating advanced moderation tools from the Fediverse to enhance user experience and promote healthy content ecosystems.
  3. Community Engagement: Facilitating community outreach and engagement efforts to onboard users, gather feedback, and foster a vibrant and inclusive user community.
  4. Infrastructure: Investing in server infrastructure and maintenance to support the decentralized nature of the OMN platform and ensure reliable performance.
  5. Documentation and Training: Creating comprehensive documentation and providing training resources to empower people to effectively navigate and utilize the OMN network.

Impact: By supporting the Open Media Network, funders will contribute to the development of a groundbreaking platform that empowers people to take control of their lives and digital experiences, participate in meaningful content creation and curation, and build vibrant and resilient grassroots communities. OMN aims to democratize access to information and facilitate decentralized communication, fostering a more , transparent, and equitable digital ecosystem.

Conclusion: The Open Media Network represents a unique opportunity to revolutionize content distribution and community engagement in the digital age. With your support, we can bring this visionary project to life, empowering people and communities to reclaim power over their online experiences and build a more inclusive, democratic, and sustainable people based future. Join us in building the future of media and communication with the Open Media Network.

Thank you for considering our funding application.

Categories
Uncategorized

Outreach text for the #4opens

The framework provides a set of principles for testing, evaluating and promoting progressive social and tech projects. By adhering to these principles, people and communities support initiatives that prioritize openness, collaboration, and social good. Let’s explore how each of the can be utilized.

  1. Open Data: Open data is the foundation of transparency and accountability in tech projects. By making data freely accessible and usable by anyone, projects can foster innovation, collaboration, and democratic decision-making. Progressive social and tech initiatives can leverage #opendata to empower communities, address social inequalities, and advance public interest goals. For example, open data can be used to track government spending, monitor environmental pollution, or analyze social trends.
  2. Open Source: Open source software is essential for fostering a healthy and vibrant tech ecosystem. By providing access to source code and encouraging collaborative development, #opensource projects can accelerate innovation, improve software quality, and promote digital autonomy. Progressive social and tech initiatives can utilize open source software to build tools and platforms that empower people and challenge corporate monopolies.
  3. Open “Industrial” Standards: Open industrial standards are critical for ensuring interoperability and compatibility across diverse tech systems. By adhering to #openstandards, projects can avoid vendor lock-in, promote diversity, and facilitate innovation. Progressive social and tech initiatives can advocate for and adopt open standards to build decentralized, resilient, and inclusive tech infrastructures. For example, #openstandards for communication protocols can enable peer-to-peer networks and decentralized social media platforms.
  4. Open Process: Open process refers to the transparent and participatory decision-making processes that govern tech projects. By involving stakeholders in project planning, development, and governance, open process fosters trust, accountability, and collective ownership. Progressive social and tech initiatives can embrace #openprocess by adopting democratic and inclusive decision-making structures, such as consensus-based decision-making or participatory budgeting. For example, open process can enable community-led initiatives, address social justice issues, and promote collective well-being.

In summary, the framework provides a roadmap for advancing progressive social and tech change and challenging the dominance of centralized, proprietary tech platforms. By prioritizing openness, collaboration, and social impact, individuals and communities can support initiatives that empower users to build a more equitable and democratic tech ecosystem.

The framework provides a set of criteria for evaluating and assessing the “Nativeness” of #openweb projects. By applying these criteria, individuals and communities can make informed judgments about the transparency, inclusivity, and ethical practices of a given project. Here’s how the can work to assign ratings/badges to #openweb projects based on the criteria, a loose evaluation process assessing each criterion against a set of user defined criteria and assigning scores accordingly. Projects could then display these ratings/badges prominently on their websites or documentation, allowing users to quickly assess their openness and transparency. Additionally, centralized registry or directory can be created to showcase and promote projects that adhere to the principles, providing users with a trusted resource for discovering and supporting openweb initiatives.