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 #4opens 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 #4opens, 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.

Looking at #DIY projects

Looking at failures offers lessons: the importance of balancing sustainability with integrity, the necessity of regenerating core culture in growing communities, and the need for healthy conflict resolution to prevent ideological capture. In each case, the projects burned bright for a time, flashes of what’s possible when people come together to build outside the #mainstreaming. But without tending to the human side of organizing, even the most vibrant initiatives unravel.

The #VillageButty project was a vital social hub for London’s boater community, a floating space where people gathered, share stories, and maintain the traditions of life on the waterways. It served as a beacon of #boaterculture, offering a place for community events, music, and collective organizing. However, the project’s survival depended on a delicate balance: generating enough income to sustain itself while remaining true to its grassroots ethos. Commercializing too much risked alienating the people it was meant to serve, while staying purely community-driven made it financially precarious. We struggled to navigate this tension. Attempts to expand and bring in outside funding diluted the project’s identity, and without enough internal cohesion, the balance tipped. The Butty lost its anchor, and despite the clear need for such a space, we failed to keep as a centre of the #Londonboater community.


The #LondonHackspace was a cornerstone of the DIY and maker scene, a living example of what can be achieved through collective skill-sharing and open collaboration. Initially stewarded by an invisible affinity group, people who quietly maintained the space and nurtured its culture, it flourished as a haven for experimentation and tech creativity. But success came with growing pains. As membership surged, the core collective was overwhelmed, leading to burnout and disengagement. The influx of new members diluted the shared values that had held the space together. Without that core cultural glue, informal trust-based governance gave way to rigid bureaucracy. Conflict, once mediated through affinity bonds, spilled out in toxic online discussions, poisoning real-world interactions. The space itself became drained of energy, losing its spark. It became a lesson in how scale can crush solidarity if care isn’t taken to regenerate the social fabric that makes spaces like this thrive. It failed.

The #HiveDalston started as a promising experiment in community space, a potential sanctuary for grassroots organizing, creative expression, and radical thought. The idea was to create an open, collaborative environment, but without a shared vision or clear conflict-resolution practices, ideological fractures emerged. Political differences, personal agendas, and unspoken tensions built up over time, eventually boiling over. Instead of addressing the underlying issues, one faction seized control, remolding the project in their image. What was meant to be a space for collective liberation became just another battleground, mirroring the very dynamics it had hoped to disrupt. The Hive became a cautionary tale of how personal politics and a lack of structural care can fracture communities. We failed.

I need to add #socialhub and the #Fediverse, maybe #ActivityPub, #resistanceexhibition to this list.

Libertarian #Fediverse “cats”

This story is about a group of libertarian #Fediverse “cats” who convinced one of the largest and most bureaucratic institutions, the European Union, to embrace decentralized and #openweb technologies. Through outreach efforts, EU-sponsored events and advocating to policy-makers, they raised awareness of the benefits of decentralized models of the internet and the positive impact this has on creating a more equitable and sustainable online environment for European citizens.

As the #Fediverse, #Mastodon, and #ActivityPub continues to rapidly grow in popularity, the #openweb cultural values at the heart of this outreach have been validated. Through continued grassroots community building and outreach efforts, radical activist have the potential to empower users and promote an inclusive, equitable, and sustainable online environment for all of us.

Please help tell this real life story https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/eu-outreach-if-we-dont-tell-our-story-am-not-sure-who-will/2950

 

Please share this #openweb project widly thanks

The #OGB is focused on decentralized and autonomous models of governance for the #fediverse and #openweb groups. It aims to resist the imposition of traditional top down power structures and promote social change and challenge by involving community members in decision-making and empowering them to shape their “producer” communities.

The project will leverage existing open-source technologies and the #fediverse infrastructure, and will balance structure and flexibility to promote creativity, innovation, and sustainability. The project has three main subjects of discussion: 1) the tradition of working activist grassroots organizing, 2) the use of technological federation and ActivityPub, and 3) original thinking for grassroots #openweb producer governance. The project is bound by the #4opens and #PGA principles and will be conducted using #KISS online tools.

#ActivityPub is a protocol for decentralized social networking that is based on #openweb standards. It provides client and server APIs for creating, exchanging, and receiving content, as well as notifications and other activities. The protocol uses the #ActivityStreams vocabulary and defines key concepts such as Actors (profiles), Objects (content), Inbox, and Outbox to facilitate communication and interaction between users in a decentralized network.

A look at the recent history of radical grassroots activism

#ClimateCamp was a radical grassroots direct action movement to directly challenge #climatechaos and raise awareness about climate change and advocate for solutions to mitigate its effects. The movement was made up of a loosely organized network of activists who used a diversity of tactics to achieve their goals. Climate Camps were established in many countries. The movement reached its peak in the late 2000s and early 2010s and had a significant impact on public debate and government policy.

#Protestcamps are gatherings of activists who set up temporary camps in public spaces in order to bring attention to a cause or issue. The goal of these camps is to create a direct action space where people come together, discuss and demonstrate. The camps may range from #fluffy peaceful gatherings to more #spiky disruptive and confrontational events, depending on the nature of the issue protested and the diversity of tactics of the activists involved. Some well-known examples of protest camps include #Occupy, #ClimateCamp

#CriticalMass a decentralized activism movement started in 1992. The movement is centred around a monthly direct action bike ride where participants gather to raise awareness about car culture. The idea behind Critical Mass is to reclaim public space for cyclists and to assert the right of cyclists to use the roads. The rides are a festive and celebratory event, this activism as since spread to cities around the world, with similar events taking place in many countries.

I bring these movements and traditions up because using #openweb tech tools like #RSS and #ActivityPub has benefits in the context of direct action and grassroots politics.

  • Decentralization: RSS and ActivityPub are decentralized technologies that are not controlled by any single entity, making them resistant to censorship and control.
  • Interoperability: By using open standards like ActivityPub, organizations and individuals can communicate and share content with each other, regardless of the platform they use.
  • Transparency: The use of #openweb tools can increase transparency and accountability in the political process, allowing for greater public scrutiny and engagement.
  • Ownership: By using #opensource tools, individuals and organizations can own and control their data, rather than relying on proprietary services controlled by corporations.
  • Accessibility: By using #openweb technologies, information can be more easily accessible to those who are marginalized or excluded from the mainstream, enabling more inclusive and equitable participation in the political process.

These tools and traditions can help direct action and grassroots politics, tech is an important tool for effecting social change. Direct action refers to forms of activism that seeks to achieve a goal directly, without intermediaries, often through disruptive or confrontational means. Direct action can include strikes, sit-ins, blockades, and other forms of resistance.

Grassroots politics refers to a political movement or approaches bottom-up, rather than top-down, meaning it seeks to empower citizens to take action on political issues, rather than on traditional power structures such as political parties or government. Grassroots politics gives a voice to marginalized or underrepresented communities to create change from the ground up.
Together, grassroots direct action and offer a way for people to engage in the political process and to bring about change in a democratic and inclusive way. By taking action outside traditional political channels, activists and communities bring about change on issues that they care about.

We can see the seed of this in the #Fediverse, a #openweb decentralized social network consisting of independent, community run servers that are all compatible with each other. This allows for a more open and democratic internet experience, as people can choose to participate in online communities without relying on single centralized platforms. The Fediverse is seen as a more privacy-friendly alternative to the #dotcons, but this is a working “white lie” based on #4opens thinking.

What is happening today? #XR “Extinction Rebellion,” a global social movement that uses non-violent civil disobedience to protest against the failure of governments to take action on the climate and ecological crisis. The movement disrupts the status quo and forces political leaders to take immediate action to address the crisis. The movement was founded in the UK in 2018 and has since spread to other countries around the world, with a focus on large-scale protests and acts of civil disobedience.

#XR is a protest movement, some #fluffy people classify XR as a #spiky radical protest movement due to its tactics and goals, but others consider it more liberal because of its commitment to #fluffy non-violence. Ultimately, the classification of XR as radical or liberal depends on individuals looking at the problem, it’s a debate.

What can we do to help contemporary activism? Programming and ideology are different areas that intersect. Ideology refers to a set of beliefs, values, and assumptions that shape an understanding of the world and people’s place in it. In the context of programming, ideology comes into play when a programmer brings their often #mainstreaming values and beliefs to the coding they write and the systems they build. You can see this in the copying of the #dotcons to build the #fediverse and how this is now shaping the current #openweb reboot.

In the current mess, most real radical social change and challenge projects get bogged down in discussing invisible #postmodernism and the criticism of “isms”. This hole in our ideas of blindly following #mainstreaming ideology can make a person a “zombie” to limit the ability to think critically. The phrase #nothingnew is used to suggest that fresh thinking on old issues is needed, rather than blindly following existing dead #mainstreaming ideologies. The use of ad hominem arguments, which is a type of logical fallacy attacking individuals rather than the argument they are making, is clearly #blocking. to make this reboot work, we do need to compost this mess.

The #OMN project focuses on linking alt/grassroots media, to play a role in rebooting the #openweb and thus avoiding the #blocking by #fashernista and #geekproblem agenda. The #openweb is the internet where information and content is accessible to all, regardless of their location, device or network, and can be shared, linked, and re-used without restrictions or barriers imposed by proprietary platforms, walled gardens, or monopolistic practices.

This path needs to be often contrasted with the #closedweb or “walled garden web”, where content and data are locked behind proprietary platforms, controlled by corporations or governments, and subject to limitations, restrictions, and surveillance. The #dotcons

DRAFT

A conversation on trust and tech with #OMN projects

Remember the #fedivers is built like this, no geek in their right minds would do this, yet we use it every day

All our existing code is based on #feudalism master (admin) surf (user) this is why it is defenceless vs capitalism (#dotcons)

There have been attempts to build democratic code, early #wikis, think #indymedia

#geekproblem “common sense” shifted them back into feudalism.

We have a hard #BLOCK on democratic code, if you want to change/challenge then this blocking needs to be removed.

The #OMN is a project for this, it’s an uphill battle to bring democracy into our coding.

This is the media project (text needs a update” unite.openworlds.info/Open-MedOFFLINE

Governance for horizontals to talk to “vertical power” unite.openworlds.info/Open-MedOFFLINE

And a video for you visionon.tv/w/jqTdss1qrdk4yEZi OFFLINE

We get into the details, of the #OMN you would get Boleyn tag changes on import, so you can auto translate guardian issued tags and add your own tags with both rules and manually.

These tags would flow out of your instances and could flow back to the guardian if you trusted each other.

The idea is to turn news stories/videos into “commons” objects with rich flowing metadata… done in a #KISS way based on trust/moderated link/flows

RSS bring in the legacy objects #activitypub is the main transport protocol.

It’s the news part of the #fediverse, our first implementation of this would be #indmediaback

The idea is to decenter the server, the data is in a soup that flows… #activertypub is two-way this is need to build the horizontal network, so the soup does not ONLY flow one way.

Nobody is in charge, no slaves, no masters. Only trusted or moderated flows. It needs to be two-way, though you are right people being human meany will be one way. BUT we are not building it that way 🙂

RSS brings the legacy in, and it’s a simple display format for embeds and passive news feeds etc.

I think people find the “nobody is in charge” bit a very hard thing to understand, even though we have built meany networks/social groups on this idea, and still do.

In the realm of tech, I call this #blocking the #geekproblem and to get anywhere we need to take the “problem” outa “geek” or we are left with the mess (in a bad way)

#KISS

An activist history of the web

The “better” #closedweb (ISP intranets) was “surprisingly” destroyed by the “inferer” #openweb, which then exploded in use to spread everywhere. The #mainstreaming thinking then tried and failed to recapture this #4opens project for ten years as it takes up global space, and was a real challenge change, that the “common sense” said should not exist. This working alternative was finally sold out by our own #fahernistas, who bribed with money and statues members of the “unthinking” #geekproblem to build the #dotcons that rapidly took over the #openweb space.

Our wider activist #fashernistas created “liberal stories” about how embracing the #dotcons was a good path. The wider #fahernistas flocked to these #closedweb spaces to grasp at the real early power they provided, after society had finished this shift, the bate and switch took this power away, and we were left with “servalence capitalism” and no social power, as was obvuse at the time it was a con.

Our #fashernistats then pissed tech change/challenge agenst the wall for ten years. While the #openweb user facing technology withered, ignored and irrelevant to #mainstreaming. A few years ago we had an “accidental” #openweb reboot with #activitypub and soon after pushing of the next generation of #closedweb projects with #web03 leaving us in the current messy times.

Yes now the #dotcons are roting, but the #openweb is only a small change challenge due to our #fahernistas and #geekproblem actively #BLOCKING the change challenge inherent to the project.

Where are we now and what can we learn from this? Liberalism in tech are often active prats, co-opting, bait and switch and taking the easy #NGO funded path when the choice comes. They are #friendlyenemies, even when they deny this with all their “common sense”. Ideas to mediate this, please?

Do you except that “new” is often #deathcult (neo-liberalism) and #postmodernism because this is “common sense” what is your plan/idea to get around these problems?

I have had 20 years of “new” and am very underwhelmed, actually it’s almost all #blocking or adding to the #techshit to be composed. This is obviously a problem that needs to be mediated, what is your plan/process to have a better outcome?

Remember that the only thing that has worked in the last 10 years has been copying #dotcons with #activertypub every themselves has failed, what can we learn from this?

This is an important question that the #OMN project mediates.

Dig, plant, grow. Compost the #techshit, repeat.

Q. We need to be honest about this

A. I joined here only recently to experiment with the Fediverse, and that’s my first impression too. The two hottest kinds of topic I found were meta discussions such as “Twitter users will come here now”, and “the system is fucking with us using vaccines”.

Q. we build at Alt but will people come, some will. Moving away from the #dotcons it’s a tiny step we need to do more, MUCH more #OMN

A. people use the mainstream media because there they can find the information they want, their friends, and have a pleasant experience with highly usable tools. Only a very small group of people would use a privacy-oriented social media with complexities such as a federated network just because “fuck the system”. Even a nerd with the obsession for cybersecurity and privacy like me has an hard time finding interesting stuff here. And, believe me, I’m trying.

Q. this is an excellent question to ansear.

There are two points:

Firstly, we had exalent outreach alt media around for 20 years, #indymediaback is an example project that we need coders to help reboot.

Secondly, to think that we/you have any chance of grassroots progressive social change challenge without working alt media is a fatal fantasy. We can clearly see this in the mess of the last ten years.

We have the codeing tools #activitypub, and we have the historical social models that we know used to work, but had scaling issues.

The #OMN plan is simple, bring the new working technical scaling to the old working social models/process #4opens

As you say the fedivers made up of copies of #dotcons is too small a step.. We have to take the next step if we have any seruse ideas about change/challenge of the current #mainstreaming #deathcult

We have to change, challenge our social ideas and social process in what is left of the #openweb

This is less fundermentalist than it sounds as open-source (free softer) development already works mostly #4opens so the change being pushed by the #OMN is #nothingnew

This should be easy, but #BLOCKING has obviously to be overcome, dig, plant, grow. Compost the #techshit, repeat. One good first step is to be honest about our own funding.

A. being “alternative” is not a strong selling point because you define yourself relatively to something else instead of having your own identity. This dooms you to be always in the shadow of “the mainstream” as a sort of second choice.

Q. Being alternative USED to have a strong identity as did #openweb and yes you are right they DO NOT have this any more, this is a problem we should change challenge not except as “common sense”.

Think before replying as this conversation is more about agreeing then division, focus is good.

A simple look at the #OMN project

The are few if any working humane alternatives to the current #deathcult worship, thus for meany stepping away from this mess is simply not an option. The #OMN is about proof of concepts to build off what we know works combined with the new technology of federation (activitypub) to scale these small scale to wider social projects. The #OGB #indymediaback #4opens are stepping stones to a different, sustainable world.

#BLOCKING this is stupid and irresponsible.

Keep your thinking #KISS

Interesting to think about why people put so much energy into #BLOCKING

All #OMN projects are based on grassroots organisation that we know works, the innovation is in using “technological federation” to scale these working social projects using #activitypub that the fedivers is based on, which we know works.

Mainstreaming people who spend energy #blocking the fedivers are the same people who would come into a protest camp and reject and try and force change on the working process.

Really good questions, let’s try and address some issues

The need for “governance” came out of a practical #openweb problem, the #activitypub community is made up of “cats” you know the slogan “herding cats” we were doing seminars outreach to powerful EU Eurocrats on why they should be interested in #activertypub and interesting they really are interested. We had no voice, only “cats” with everyone pushing their own tiny projects, it was a lot of work and stress, but we got the presentations done.

Back to the questions. A lot of the issues you are outlining are actually covered outside what is normally though of as process – It’s designed to be messy, it’s not designed to be tidy. Let’s illustrate this by answering each point.

Yep, they do, but they are subject to “recall”, and gain a lot from working with the “groups” the voices only get TOTAL power with consensus -1 which is a hard thing to achieve without the first working to building consensus through the body and groups and other voices.

You are right the is no sense checking in the formal sense, but remember the is no hard power, people only have to do things if they want to, its “governance” of a disorganization not a traditional power structure. If people get too “nutty” the is the power of “recall” if the body becomes too nutty the is the power of “dilution” more people can join the body.

The groups don’t have to talk to anyone, though will work better when they do, the voices can be involved or not worked better when they are – good to remember the “cats” at the beginning on this post.

The is no statute and no laws, as this is “governance” with equation marks – there will be a growing body of mythos and traditions that people can call on when making decisions. There are no police or courts, nobody has to do anything agen the  “cats”.

The body has negative power over the voices, it can recall them, which is the same as not signing off on their actions. The problem we are trying to solve is focus, in an anarchistic/libertarian movement – how to talk to traditional burocraceys while still talking/being relevant to ourselves. The is a level of trust involved which is held in place by the #4opens

That’s a good question, that is not defined. It’s important to look at the codebase here, everything we talk about is the “default” the actual codebase can redefine just about every variable, it’s a set of tools for horazonatlish “governance” It’s up to the body to decide everything on how to use these tools if they change the default.

We have the traditional voting modals, we have a threshold etc.

The body can be restricted in size by fixing the first variable in this case it would be the instances/stakeholders or can be left to grow organically this is up to the body itself.

The group is made up of anybody in the body who needs to be a part of it – in this everything is a mirror of the same process #KISS You ask a hard question about “outside” experts/original submitter which I don’t have an easy solution to – so we would add it as an option that can be turned on or off.

They serve the same as the body, currently have two options 1 year, half every 6 month rolling to facilitate hand holding or easy/simple one year.

Due to the sortation and work load you will likely have a high turn over of new body members, the “recalling” will add to this as there are a lot of “nutters” sortation will bring up fresh people for the body to work :wink: this is a good thing as “trust” is built from this.

The voices are “trusted” to be a voice of the Fediverse for their term, if they are not “trusted” they will be recalled to the body, and if they are nutters they will be recalled out of the body and a new member added ECT.

Yep decisions can be made at different levels, on the image the thickness of the arrow coming out (with the blunt end) is the strength of that voice.

The group says it shite, and then move on, if the group keeps pushing shit then the voices ignore this group and in the end the body likely recalls it and replaces it with a new group – this is up to the body/voices.

Yes, sadly some good decisions that are not popular inside/outside the body/groups will be ignored we are still self “governing” cats the is no getting away from this.

Yep, based on the #4opens, so everything is done with activertypub in open process, it’s a trust based network, if people won’t privacy then they can resign/not sign up for public governance and work through people who are happy to do open process.

Whistleblowering is a case for media not “governance” so is dealt with in this sister project Home – Open-Media-Network – Gitea: Open Media Network

Thank you for the interesting questions.

Should we do something that is native to the Fediverse, and what would this look like?

The #Fediverse is #anarchism this is likely the best description of the community.
A represents the Greek anarkhia (‘without ruler/authority’), and the circle can be read as the letter O , standing for order or organization.
We currently have a Herding cats governance in the Fediverse and the projects that make it up
An idiom denoting a futile attempt to control or organize a class of entities which are inherently uncontrollable
This was very evident in the outreach to the #EU project.
We have the A but we do not have the O – we are asking what would the O look like in a online social tech project?
The #liberal #foundation model will be forced onto us if the Fediverse is taken up buy large #Burocratic orgs like the #EU and yes the will be a figleaf of “democracy” placed over the self-selecting oligarchy that will be put into place by “power politics” that this path embeds.
This path is the default outcome.
Should we do something that is native to the Fediverse, and what would this look like?

Q. how can someone “take up” the fediverse while it’s based on free software and open protocols like #activitypub, that are available to everyone and cannot be taken up by anyone?

A. Microsoft used to be very good at “taking up” open source projects. Google is VERY good at doing this… I think this is a part of the crises in #FSF foundation currently. When a big institution brings money and resources into an underfunded project it takes power and shapes the agender.

Q. Platform cooperatives, owned and run by users. Coupling this with netcommons. I am trying to launch PoC in ****

A. This is a path. My experience of this path is problematic and have repeatedly seen “process geeks” kill social movements by ossification of process, without any idea of the damage they are actually doing.

The whole tech co-op movement smells like this issue. But I don’t know anufe about this to make a judgment so kinda put the movement to one side for now.

Looking for places where it works on the ground is always a good thing. Examples please.

#mainstreaming #openweb standerds to the #EU

I have been working with a group based around the activitypub socialhub to outreach the #fedivers and #activitypub  standard to the #EU in seminars you can see the video recording in this post. Looking like the #EU will trial a few fedivers apps as tools for communication.

ActivityPub For Administrations (with chat) 2021-04-19
This is a recording of the first webinar in the ActivityPub for Administrations series.
This version also displays the live chat during the webinaire.

https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/pub/ec-ngi0-liaison-webinars-and-workshop-april-2021

ActivityPub For Administrations 2021-04-26

This is a recording of the second webinar in the ActivityPub for Administrations series.

https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/pub/ec-ngi0-liaison-webinars-and-workshop-april-2021

My thought on -Outreaching ActivityPub to the EU

It’s a good fit both strategically, in challenging the big US tech corporations dominance and tactically, in it being simple to implement and open to innovation as it is outside of anyone group control and agendas.

The #EU implementing AP could help to reset the capture of the WWW (which made the internet human) its good to remember was a European project – The birth of the Web | CERN home.cern/science/computing/bi

Let’s look at practical small steps to make this happen.

My thoughts/feelings are pragmatic on a good outcome.