Tag: blocking

Liberalism – is not for you

The Myth of the Middle Class: The so-called “middle class” is a constructed concept that never truly existed. If you work for a boss and earn wages or a salary, you are a worker, a member of the working class, and should take pride in that identity. The term “middle class” was created to isolate more privileged workers, serving the interests of the powerful by dividing the working population. This division prevents unity among workers and keeps them from collectively challenging the institutions and power structures that maintain their oppression.

A critique of #liberalism from a #Marxist perspective.

1. Marxist Analysis of History

  • Class-Based Analysis: Marxists analyse history based on class struggles and material conditions, rather than simple “common sense” ideas or metaphysical concepts.
  • Material Conditions: Ideas, including those of influential thinkers like Marx, are shaped by the material conditions of their time.

2. Historical Context of Liberalism

  • Western European Phenomenon: Liberalism developed primarily in Western Europe within a feudal background.
  • Urban Centres and the Rise of the Bourgeoisie: Economic and technological developments in urban centres led to the rise of the bourgeoisie (burghers), who eventually clashed with feudal landlords.
  • Guilds and Standardization: The formation of guilds standardized production methods, leading to increased productive capacity and economic power for the bourgeoisie.
  • Class Struggle and Political Power: The #bourgeoisie eventually overthrew the #feudal order, leading to bourgeois democratic revolutions in Europe during the 18th and 19th centuries.

3. Ideological Tenets of Liberalism

  • Individual Liberty: Claimed to support individual freedom, but in practice, this freedom can be suspended at will.
  • Anti-Concentration of Power: Advocates for a plurality of power to prevent tyranny, but often consolidates power when necessary to protect capitalist interests.
  • Constitutionalism: Constitutions serve to protect capitalist relations and private property, often disregarded when inconvenient for the ruling class.
  • Pro Minority Rights: Initially meant the rights of property owners (bourgeoisie), not class, racial or ethnic minorities.
  • Sanctification of Private Property: Private property is central to capitalism and liberalism, and its protection is paramount for maintaining bourgeois power.
  • Capitalism: Liberalism supports capitalist economic structures, often contradicting its own ideals of freedom and equality to do this.

4. Critique of Liberalism

  • Contradictory Philosophy: Liberalism claims to champion individual liberty and anti-tyranny, but primarily serves the interests of the bourgeoisie.
  • Superficial Plurality: The appearance of multiple parties and democratic plurality is a façade, with fundamental capitalist interests remaining unchanged.
  • Constitutional Limitations: Constitutions are tools to maintain capitalist order, with true reforms (like abolishing private property) being impossible within liberal frameworks.
  • Selective Minority Rights: The protection of minority rights under liberalism prioritizes property owners.
  • Economic Supremacy: Liberalism’s main function is to protect the economic supremacy of the capitalist class, and it can easily and quickly transition to #fascism when capital feels threatened.

Conclusion

Liberalism, according to a Marxist, is a tool for maintaining bourgeois power and protecting capitalist interests. It presents itself as a philosophy of freedom and equality, but is contradictory in implementation to serving the ruling capitalist class.

#KISS, our liberal “common sense” is a #blocking problem on this.

Understanding #OMN and the #GeekProblem

One thing I do on this site is to use the #OMN hashtag story to address the challenges and opportunities in the tech world, particularly in mediating the #geekproblem, this involves leveraging the power of storytelling, community engagement, and strategic advocacy as pats to compost the mess we find our selves in.

In the #geekproblem, there are two distinct paths. One path leads to the geeks who won’t code for changing human nature; they are consumed by the #deathcult, kneeling in reverence to it. The other path leads to those who stand tall, observing the world and crafting tools to compost the #techshit created by the first group. The rest are useless #blocking, whinging or both.

A structured approach to take this path:

Understanding #OMN and the #GeekProblem

  • #OMN (Open Media Network): This represents a vision and workable path to an open, decentralized media network that empowers people and communities by giving them control over content creation and distribution.
  • The GeekProblem: This refers to the social and cultural issues within the tech community, such as elitism, lack of diversity, and communication barriers between technologists and the broader public. Rooted in the need for control.

Steps to Use #OMN for Change

  1. Define the Narrative:
    • Craft a compelling story around #OMN that highlights the #4opens potential to democratize media, enhance transparency, and grow collaboration.
    • Emphasize how #OMN can be used to mediate the #geekproblem by creating more inclusive and accessible technology environments.
  2. Engage the Community:
    • Use the hashtag #OMN to build a community around the progressive tech vision. Encourage contributions from diverse people, including those who have been marginalized in the tech world.
    • Host online discussions, webinars, and collaborative projects to foster a sense of belonging and shared purpose.
  3. Highlight Success Stories:
    • Showcase examples of successful #OMN implementations and how they can have positive social impacts on communities.
    • Share stories of people and groups who have mediated the #geekproblem by adopting open, inclusive practices.
  4. Create Educational Content:
    • Develop and distribute resources that explain the principles of #OMN and how they can be applied to solve real-world problems.
    • Offer tutorials, case studies, and best practices to help people understand and implement #OMN concepts.
  5. Promote Open Dialogue:
    • Facilitate discussions about the challenges within the tech community, using #OMN as a framework for finding solutions.
    • Encourage honest conversations about elitism, diversity, and inclusivity, and how these issues can be addressed through open networks.
  6. Advocate for Policy Changes:
    • Work with policymakers and industry leaders to promote policies that support #4opens and decentralized media paths and networks.
    • Advocate for regulations that encourage more transparency, user control, and ethical practices in the tech industry.
  7. Collaborate with Organizations:
    • Partner with organizations that share the vision of #OMN and inclusive tech culture.
    • Leverage these partnerships to amplify the message and reach a wider audience.
  8. Measure and Share Impact:
    • Collect feedback and data on the impact of #OMN initiatives and share these findings with the community.
    • Use this data to refine strategies and demonstrate the tangible benefits of adopting the #OMN approach.

Mediation Strategies for the #GeekProblem

  1. Foster Inclusivity:
    • Create spaces where non-technical people feel welcome and valued in tech discussions.
    • Encourage mentorship programs to help bridge the gap between experienced technologists and newcomers.
  2. Promote Diversity: Support initiatives that aim to increase diversity in tech education and employment.
  3. Enhance Communication:
    • Develop tools and platforms within the #OMN framework that facilitate clear and accessible communication, like #indymediaback
    • Encourage technologists to use plain language and avoid jargon when interacting with broader audiences.
  4. Address Elitism:
    • Challenge the culture of elitism by promoting values of #CC collaboration and shared learning.
    • Recognize and reward contributions that enhance the community rather than individual prestige.

By this strategic using the #OMN hashtag story, the wider tech community can mediate the #geekproblem and push the meaningful change we need. This approach fosters a more inclusive, collaborative, and open tech culture, benefiting both the #mainstreaming and Alt-society.

You can support this here https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

We must reckon with the consequences of our past decisions

One thing we can all now likely agree is that we have made a complete mess of our society, ecology and tech paths. The intertwining of #postmodernist social thinking and #neoliberal economic ideology over the past four decades has laid the groundwork for the turbulent state of contemporary politics and the social chaos evident in our digital ecosystems (#dotcons)

This marriage of ideologies led to a fracturing of political values and an obscuring of ideological divides, resulting in the polarization and dysfunction we witness in both right and left-wing politics. In the realm of technology, this has resulted in the proliferation of centralized platforms and the erosion of community.

“From the outset of the industrial revolution, what is nostalgically called “laissez-faire” was in fact a system of continuing state intervention to subsidize accumulation, guarantee privilege, and maintain work discipline.”
— Kevin Carson

For forty years, we’ve marched down this dark path, “unwittingly” shaping the current “human nature” through the failed dogmatic #blinded collective choices and actions. Now, as we confront the existential threats growing #climatechaos and ecological degradation, we must reckon with the consequences of our decisions.

The next four decades will be marked by hardship, suffering, and loss as we grapple with the consequences of our past actions. As a first step, it’s very useful we acknowledge our role in shaping this grim reality and take responsibility for charting a new course forward.

It’s time to reject the poisoned philosophies and economic doctrines that have brought us to this precipice. We must reclaim agency over our collective future and commit to a path of social healing, reconciliation, and renewal.

Acknowledging our complicity in creating this mess is the first step towards redemption. The path I am outlining to do this is to embrace the power of #openweb collective action and solidarity, working together to build a more just, equitable, and sustainable world for generations to come.

One of the strong #blocking of this is to see this social thinking as simply an individualistic moral judgment, this would be using the current mess to judge the current mess. An all too common, hopeless path to walk down, and would only lead to the pushing of more mess. Please try not to take this path, thanks.

Let point out a glaringly obverse statement, I am not saying that these ways of thinking are not working as intended, they obviously are. Postmodernism has been used to disintegrate social norms that bind society together, it has done this. Neoliberalism has been used to divide the rich and the poor, it has done this. The moral judgment is not in the effectiveness of these paths but in our choice of path.

These too dead philosophy together push social disintegration that lubricated the pushing of the divide between the rich and the poor to the extremes that are growing today. It’s important not to simple see this as a moral judgment, as it’s a natural outcome of the path we have chosen to walk over the last 40 years, the moral judgment is on the path we have chosen.

#Fediverse how can we do better

#Fediverse how can we do better at this https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/the-process-platform-isnt-working/3923/6

The current move in #blocking of the #dotcons moving to the #openweb is not a real solution, it’s like we are putting our heads in the sand. We need to understand that our “native” projects are #4opens thus anyone, including the #dotcons can be a part of the #openweb in this it’s a good thing they are moving back to this space.

Feel free to block them, but pushing this path as a solution is both naive and self-defeating. We need to do better and build a healthy culture and a diverstay of tools, it’s always a fight, hiding in a cave wins no wars, and we are in a war.

Issues within the #Fediverse community regarding the handling of problematic behaviour or interactions on the platform. A breakdown of some points:

  1. Problem with Blocking: That simply blocking users or instances (such as the #dotcons) is not an effective long-term solution to fostering a healthy and diverse community within the Fediverse. Blocking is “putting your head in the sand,” ignoring or isolating problematic elements doesn’t resolve underlying issues.
  2. Advocating for Openness: Emphasizes that the Fediverse should remain true to its principles of openness (#4opens), which allow anyone, including controversial entities like the #dotcons, to participate. This openness is a positive aspect of the #openweb.
  3. Building a Healthy Culture: Rather than relying on blocking, we need to advocate for actively building a healthy culture within the #Fediverse. This involves nurturing diversity of tools and fostering a community where constructive engagement and dialogue can thrive.
  4. Need for Engagement and Solutions: The importance of proactive engagement and problem-solving. We need to warn against passivity (“hiding in a cave”) and encourages efforts to address challenges head-on to create a stronger and more resilient ecosystem.

Overall, a call for constructive action within the #Fediverse community, moving beyond simple blocking measures and focusing on building a robust and inclusive path that aligns with core values of openness and diversity. With an emphasis on proactive engagement, collective responsibility, and continuous improvement to create a healthier online and offline environment.

humm needs more… what do you think?

Building trust in the openweb and Fediverse

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

Trust is the soil 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, converging and interacting, 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 between people and communities.

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

What can we do?

  1. Transparency: Transparency is key to building trust within communities. Open and honest communication about intentions, decisions, and actions grows a sense of accountability and reliability. Projects and peoples need to strive to be transparent in their paths, sharing information openly and engaging in dialogue with different stakeholders.
  2. Inclusivity: Inclusive communities are more likely to cultivate trust among their members. In this we need to seek out diverse perspectives and voices, and creating spaces where people feel welcome and valued, communities foster a sense of belonging. Inclusivity also involves addressing power imbalances and amplifying silent voices.
  3. Consistency: Consistency in actions and behaviour is needed for building trust over time. Communities need to strive to uphold commitments, follow through on promises, and maintain integrity in 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 build mutual understanding and respect. Empathy involves active listening, acknowledging the feelings and concerns of others, and responding with compassion and kindness.
  5. Collaboration: By creating opportunities for people to work together towards common goals, and engaging in collaborative projects, sharing resources, to support each other’s efforts, communities build bonds of trust and solidarity.

Now, how can we build these? Trust is the cornerstone of any thriving #openweb path and the building of the wider #fediverse community. We need to 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, and commitment from all #4opens stakeholders.

“Don’t be a prat” is basic #KISS

Historically, #mainstreaming politics has a tendency to shift to the right during times of crisis

The intersection of #climatechange, #mainstreaming politics, and fear is complex but they do influence social attitudes and policies. Historically, mainstream politics exhibits a shift to the right during times of crisis, and the looming mess of #climatechaos is following this trend. In this, we need to recognize the pivotal role that fear plays in driving right-wing politics and shaping public discourse.

Fear operates as a strong motivator of political attitudes and policies, particularly within right-wing ideologies. Whether it manifests as apprehension over economic instability, cultural change, or national security, fear is fertile ground for the growing of right-wing narratives. In the context of climatechaos, this fear is further amplified by concerns surrounding environmental degradation, natural disasters, migration, and resource scarcity. Such apprehensions provide a breeding ground for the shift to the hard right, that feeds on these anxieties to promote its agenda.

However, amidst this landscape of fear, a counterpoint emerges: the waning fear of socialism. Traditionally, socialism is met with suspicion and trepidation by capitalist classes, serving as a perceived threat to the status quo. Yet, as socialist ideals gain traction and legitimacy in #mainstreaming discourse, particularly among younger generations, the fear of socialism begins to diminish. This shifting dynamic challenges the hegemony of right-wing politics and offers a glimmer of hope for progressive change in the growing mess.

Indeed, this shift presents an opportunity for hope. By embracing socialist principles and advocating for progressive policies, there is potential to counteract the politics of fear perpetuated by the right. However, this window of opportunity is narrowing in the face of escalating #climatechaos. The urgency of the climate crisis demands immediate action, and the failure to seize this opportunity through #mainstreaming inaction exacerbate the cycle of fear and despair.

In essence, the delicate balance between fear and hope shapes political narratives and responses to climate change. While fear may dominate #mainstreaming politics in the short term, there remains a potential for collective action and progressive change. In #openweb tech initiatives such as the Open Media Network (#OMN), #OGB, #indymediaback, and #makeinghistory exemplify efforts to challenge the status quo and take a course towards a future grounded in resilience, equity, and sustainability, growing a society that prioritizes collective the well-being and environmental stewardship that we need.

The problem we face is composting our own #blocking behaver, so more people can supports projects like these.

The Open Governance Body: Revolutionizing Governance with Grassroots Tech

In our ever-evolving digital spheres, governance is often left behind, struggling to catch up with the pace of technology and social change. Among the many attempts to tackle this problem, there’s one that stands out for #KISS innovative and participatory approach: the Open Governance Body (#OGB). This grassroots, federated project is more than another tech experiment; it’s a historical blueprint for any future of human-scale governance.

The Flawed Systems of Old

Let’s face it-governance, as we know it, is very far from perfect. Our current systems are either too unwieldy for large-scale implementation or too limited for local contexts. Traditional Free/Open Source (#FOSS) governance models might be native to the tech world, but they’re entrenched in a medieval hierarchy, reminiscent of kings, nobles, and peasants. Who needs feudalism in the digital age?

#Mainstreaming politics, with its disasters’ ineffectuality in the face of #climatechaos, also demonstrates that we desperately need something that works – something innovatively rooted yet freely scalable.

Grassroots Activism Meets the Fediverse

Enter the #OGB, a robust fusion of proven federated technology and grassroots governance. It’s the brainchild of a diverse group of independent experienced thinkers and activists who understand that, progressive social change has always sprung from the bottom up. They’ve taken the federated solution of #ActivityPub (think decentralized social networks) and meshed it with organic activist governance.

This blend gave birth to a surprisingly simple yet powerful platform based on sortation, where roles and responsibilities are distributed fairly, fostering efficient decision-making.

A Tale of European Success

The potential of #OGB is more than just theoretical talk – it’s processs have been field-tested with promising results. Our band of “libertarian cats” successfully outreached to the European Union, showcasing the versatility of ActivityPub and the #fediverse. Presentations and collaborations with EU bureaucrats catalysed the setup of project outline, a prescient move that looked like wisdom personified post-Twitter’s dramatic downturn.

Market Dynamics – A Hypothetical Utopia

Think of a bustling local street market, a microcosm of society with stallholders, shoppers, and various stakeholders like organizers, trash collectors, and local law enforcement. The #OGB can empower such a community to self-govern in harmony, thereby bypassing the too often #blocking cumbersome bureaucracy.

It’s a permissionless rollout – meaning, creating a governance community is as easy as setting up an instance, generating a QR code, and inviting market participants to jump on board with a simple app installation. From there, a sortation algorithm orchestrates the decision-making process, naturally enticing more stakeholders to participate.

From Small Markets to Society at Large

This isn’t just about one market. The beauty of #OGB is its inherent scalability and adaptability. Just as the #fediverse has grown organically over the years, OGB can proliferate from one market to others, weaving a tapestry of self-governance that could very well encompass more social facets.

“We know the grassroots process of organizing works. We’ve seen the federated model scale times over. Combine them, and we have a DIY governance culture that could revolutionize society.”

A History of Activism, A Future of Change

The Open Governance Body is not simply a project; it is the culmination of centuries of activism and social organizing techniques, proven time and again. Combined with the remarkable technological advancements of the Fediverse, OGB embodies a modern solution rooted in historical success. It’s a rallying cry for those seeking to instil real, lasting change in the world through cooperative, human-centric means.

The future of governance looks brighter with initiatives like OGB. Unlike the faltering structures of old, this endeavor promises to usher in an era where technology enables democracy and human connection, not control and division. It’s past time to embrace the open governance body, roll up our sleeves, and be a part of the grassroots revolution.

Remember, progress doesn’t ask for permission – it is an open invitation to innovate, participate and effectuate change. Join the OGB movement, and let’s co-create a governance model that befits our times and aspirations.

Tools for outreach:

1. Have you heard about #OGB? It’s breaking boundaries in web governance through grassroots activism & federated tech! Get ready to govern your own communities with human-scale solutions that actually work.
 
2. Exciting news: The federation of #ActivityPub proves we can scale horizontally and spark real change! Combined with grassroots governance, we’re onto a new chapter of progressive social shifts. Let’s build this together!
 
3. Picture this: A street market governed organically by its community via #OGB. Stallholders, customers, and local services all have a say. Ready to revolutionize the way we collaborate and manage shared spaces?
 
4. Do you want an active role in shaping your community? With #OGB permissionless roll-outs, anyone can start making impactful decisions. Let’s grow this movement, producers by producer group, instance by instance!
 
5. Imagine a system where your voice directly influences your surroundings. #OGB is blending hundreds of years of activist governance with the scalable power of the #fediverse. Let’s make self-governance the norm!
 
6. We’re planting seeds for a #DIY grassroots culture to flourish across society with #OGB. No permission needed, just the desire for change and collaboration. Who’s ready to be part of this empowering journey?
 
 
 
 

People pushing mess is the normal #mainstreaming

I get confused with the mess people push over my views. I am a seruse guy, addressing fundamental issues that are #blocking the change and challenge, we all agree are needed in tech to address social and environmental issues,

Have been doing this at the VERY sharp face of conflict for 40 years. Please look at the hundreds of films I made on this subject, thanks.

Where do people get the idea, what am talking about is not seruseus? This is a hard-to-understand view people push, am trying in good faith to address.

Hope this helps, so we can move past this mess making, thanks.

Some of the lifework videos on youtube

#dontbeaprat is a positive statement of what’s next?

In activism (and interestingly less so in #mainstreaming life now) #stupidindividualism is a constant poison. With #blinded, people treat critical social thinking as ONLY personal criticism. This has the effect of #blocking that spreads mess over the very needed social change and challenge. Am increasingly using the  #dontbeaprat hashtag to communicate on this problem.

I think another useful hashtag on this behaviour is #blinded, which is in part self-inflicted and in part a general social outcome of the last 40 years of worshipping #postmodernism and #neoliberalism. The hashtag #deathcult is a useful “uncomfortable” way of expressing this.

Why is this such an issue, people are directly responsible for this mess making, as both of these ideologies are actually dead themselves now. It’s an intellectual zombie block.

So #dontbeaprat is a positive statement of what’s next?

Please #dontbeaprat on this, thanks.

NGI Zero open source funding talks about the @sovtechfund

NGI Zero open source funding
The @sovtechfund is offering grants to people who contribute to a sustainable open source ecosystem. Grants go up to €300,000 per application and cover three main topics:

1. Improve FOSS Developer Tooling
2. Securing FOSS Software Production
3. FOSS Infrastructure Documentation

With this program, the Sovereign Tech Fund seeks to stimulate an open digital infrastructure: fundamental technologies that enable the creation of other software.

https://sovereigntechfund.de/en/challenges/ #opensource
Three Challenges to Contribute Back to Open Source

UPDATE Looks like people are also arguing this point https://shared-digital.eu/statement/

We are pouring public funding down the drain agen, these criteria are feeding the #geekproblem not actually trying to take the “problem” out of our geek paths. The people who PUSH this agenda are the problem – please POINT at them and talk about this mess, thanks.

Can we get a link to the people making the agenda, thanks, will try polite conversation #4opens

I worked with the guy who used to be behind the #NGIzero account, we did good stuff with the #EU outreach.

The replacement, I have no idea who they are and getting #blocking

This is a #4opens fail.

In all these toots am talking past “people” to talk about things/social/groups and not directly to individuals, they are second in all these conversations. This is the place where social value lives. The problem is, we don’t have hardly any of this… which is the subject am talking about.

#blocking is not seeing this, addressing this, the is a lot of blocking going on 😉

Am happy to talk to “individuals” as a first step.

Pouring money down the drain, because the majority of the problems in the #Fediverse and the #openweb are social not technical – if they only fund technical parts of this culture they are feeding the “problem” and this problem is going to pour the resources down the drain.

I understand this is a hard conversation to have, we have to try.

First step is #4opens, WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE PUSHING MESS while doing “good”, step into the light please #openprocess

Ignoring this basic #openprocess is #blocking, this is why conversations are done in public #4opens

yes, I understand the fear this creates and the desire to #block, but this then makes the #4opens fail more visible if people wont to use this for the needed change and challenge if they don’t yes it’s more noise what are you signal or noise 🙂

Signal vs Nose.

I find #mainstreaming people to be actually mad and increasingly bad. When do we get more #4opens people pushing change challenge in these #openweb spaces, please?

Am increasingly seeing this #blocking as a culture of fear, or more real as a culture of fear pushed as power politics.

Am thinking meany people will be confused and likely mix signal with noise on this subject.

Who are the bad people, the powerless pushing the #4opens on the #openweb or the powerful Burocrats worshipping the #deathcult while protecting these thin careers in the #mainstreaming

If you find yourself agenst the first and defending the second, then you are the problem.

This makes your behaver noise, and what you do very likely to be more #techshit to compost.

I wonder if people understand what activism is on the #openweb any more?

You talk to people to explane why they are doing WRONG, and at the same time you push them as HARD as you can to change their wrong behaver.

This works best with the #fluffy #spiky debate as a core part of this process.

People who keep saying “why can’t we all get along”, and “wouldent it go better if we were nice to each other” and the PROBLEM blocking the activism from having the needed affect…

We need fresh thinking on this mess

There will be lots of VERY bad behaver from the every side in this #openweb reboot, let’s try and keep diversity of voices in place with #4opens process. Please don’t become a prat, as it’s easy to start, and it’s hard to stop, mess and more mess.

Prat ish behaver comes in waves, that matches the waves of #mainstreaming and the Alt reaction to them, this flotsam can make things messy so good to shovel and compost.

Our main #blocking in alts is from our blinded #postmodernists and the culture they have spread for the last ten years… this is very messy and will do damage. As this is a form of “common sense” it’s hard to compost.

We need fresh thinking on this mess.

On the #openweb us and them is simple, we have to define things then collectively fight as hard as we can to keep that definition #KISS

#openweb spaces, a lot of social suicidal behaver – people strive to destroy the #openweb by pushing non “native” #NGO structures and paths. It’s a hard thing to pushback on, it’s #mainstreaming “common sense” bad behaver and a VERY bad outcome, please try not to be this problem.