Thoughts on the mess we made on #socialhub and the wider #openweb reboot

The frustration of navigating the mess of activism, tech, and grassroots movements, especially when they get co-opted and sidetracked by personal interests, #NGO agendas, or broader #mainstreaming mess. We need ways to process, compost, and turn this mess into productive paths, which better balance burnout and disillusionment with actual progressive outcomes.

A part of this is the parasite #NGO and #fashionista paths, how NGOs and big parts of tech can parasitically latch onto grassroots movements, commodifying and diverting them from their own paths. These non-native ways end up taking the paths they claim to oppose, and are a part of the broader #deathcult problem. Mediating this deathcult and pratish behaviour is needed, that challenges the individualistic, egotistical people who are always a part of grassroots movements. If left unchecked, these people will derail collective efforts and reduce movements to infighting rather than the path of change and challenge we need to be on.

Composting the mess, is perhaps the most hopeful metaphor to turn #mainstreaming shit into something more fertile. This metaphor is about processing what went wrong, reflecting, and turning that energy into a better path, sustainable, and rooted in the core values of the #openweb and #4opens grassroots efforts. The mess is undeniable, but with native openweb tools and paths, composting, mediation, linking, and decentralization there’s still hope to turn this #reboot into something productive. We really need to make this work.

The normal problem, the trajectory of #SocialHub, and the broader #openweb community, simply went off course due to factors that we need to talk about:

Shrinking of the crew, led to the forced narrowing of focus, limiting the community’s ability to engage widely and creatively. As fewer people became involved, the flexibility and potential of the project shrank.
Chasing funding, is a recurring poison in many grassroots projects. The moment funding enters the picture, the focus can shift from mission driven goals to survival driven ones, leading to compromises and sell outs.
The #geekproblem, is a recurring issue where the culture of arrogance and ignorance within tech communities blocks collaborative, inclusive problem-solving. Tech culture ignores the social dimensions of community building, exacerbating problems instead of solving them.
Failed governance, feudal-like governance structures hindered the ability to mediate these issues, turning leadership into top-down control rather than fostering horizontal collaboration. Attempts like the #OGB (Open Governance Body) were/are being blocked by the systems they set out to fix, leading to a self-reinforcing mess.

What can we do, next steps:

Composting the mess, rather than seeing the failure as terminal, it’s about turning the decay into fertile ground for new growth. This composting metaphor is apt—it’s about taking what didn’t work, reflecting on it, and using it as the soil for new, better-structured efforts.
Recognizing people over code: The issue lies with people, not technology, the main barriers are social—ego, power dynamics, and lack of collaboration. Governance structures, community engagement, and shared values need to take centre.
Defining and defending the #openweb, people will inevitably sell out for funding and status. To mediate this, a clear, shared understanding, of what the openweb stands for, an articulation of principles like the #4opens is crucial. The community needs a strong value framework to guide decisions and prevent the erosion of ideals and paths.
Building a hub for meaningful engagement, #SocialHub was once this place, but it’s now too narrow and constrained by the #NGO. #fashernista and #geekproblem interests. If the community is to thrive, it needs a revitalizing, a broader range of voices participating, where governance is open, and where people are empowered to contribute without the weight of gatekeepers and blinded apathy and intolerance blocking we to often have now.
Infrastructure and funding, the practical path of supporting the infrastructure also needs addressing. The lack of funding is damage that shifts, the code itself, into became unresponsive to the community’s needs. Finding sustainable, non-exploitative funding models is needed. Could a cooperative or mutual aid model be a path forward, that aligns with the values of the #openweb while providing the necessary resources?

Immediate Actions:

Broaden governance: If we return to SocialHub or a similar network, start by widening the admin and mod team to ensure it represents more than just the narrow confines of #NGO, #fashernista and #geekproblem interests. This inclusivity prevents drift.
Articulate values clearly, by creating a visible and accessible page for the #4opens, making it a cornerstone for paths and discussions, decisions, and collaborations. People need to understand and agree on the principles driving the openweb, #KISS
Revive discussions, reignite meaningful discussions about the purpose and direction of the openweb. This needs to happen on networks where all voices are welcomed, and consensus building isn’t seen as a hindrance but a pathway forward.
Explore funding models, as the current mess is feeding this #blocking. Look into alternative funding mechanisms—cooperatives, community-supported models, or decentralized funding structures that align with openweb values. Chasing VC or NGO funding leads to the same patterns of co-optation and control.

By addressing these issues—people, governance, values, and sustainability—the community can begin to rebuild, with a “native” approach, it’s possible to compost the mess into fertile soil for future growth.

UPDATE the thread on this turned into a mess then a part of it vanished, likely someone blocked, so posting the last update here:

” I just don’t see SocialHub as likely to evolve into the kind of place for the broader discussions focusing on social issues.”

The problem we are talking about. This is exactly what #socialhub was “broader discussions focusing on social issues” for the first 3 years or so, we had the path we now need in place as native grassroots.

A tiny number of people used the #geekproblem to narrow this open space down to focus EXCLUSIVELY on the #FAP. Why and how this happens is where the value is, so we don’t keep adding to this mess, in the future.

PS, this mastodon mess of jumping from public to semi private all the time is a mess.

What can we do.

The is deep dissatisfaction with the current “common sense”, especially in the context of how it has contributed to a pervasive sense of fragmentation, meaninglessness, and cynicism in most contemporary life. The is very little meaning and action in our intellectual movements, the #blocking of the old stories, Marxism, Enlightenment ideals, and even reality itself. The last 40 years of deconstruction of meaning without offering alternatives led to our current dangerous nihilistic dead-end. We live now with “zombie ideologies,” that are not fit for the current #climatechaos driven challenges we face.

As am in Oxford, let’s look at a few of these dead academic paths. #Postmodernism became a perfect fit for the #neoliberalism of the #deathcult of the last 40 years, as both emphasize individualism, relativism, and a rejection of collective, structural change. Neoliberalism, which is still the default economic path, thrived on the breakdown of solidarity, atomizing society and leaving individuals to fend for themselves in a deregulated market economy. The crisis of meaning that postmodernism, the ideas still under much thinking, fed directly into this, with its #blocking of coherent paths for understanding the world and taking action to mediate the ongoing mess. These were both tools of the #deathcult, encouraging passive resignation instead of collective resistance.

Now, more than ever, there’s an urgent need to move away from these decaying paths and find a way that inspires collective action, hope, and builds the needed systemic change. The metaphor of shovelling shit to make compost is a powerful one. The last several decades have produced a lot of intellectual and social decay, instead of simply rejecting it all, we can take what’s useful, like a critical understanding of power structures and cultural influence—and use it to grow better.

The world is changing rapidly, and with it, the intellectual tools we need to navigate and reshape it. Let’s plant the seeds, of meaningful, grounded, collective action, grow solidarity, and a renewed sense of purpose that challenges the status quo. The question is not just about what comes next, but how we collectively build it from the ground up.

At an Oxford event – The Policy engagement workshop

“How should the new Labour government be listening?”

A few notes: Firstly it needs to be said, this is common in Oxford, this is powerless people talking about things that matter. Where activism is about forming a group of action for pushing and pulling power, this event is not activism, it’s academy, need to remember this.

“Deliberation” is a new word for the old formal consensus that ossified and broke when imposed on much grassroots activism at the turn of the century, with the rise of the #dotcons this grew into the activism mess we live in today.

And yes, it is a mess as what they focus on has little connection to the levers of power, which is controlled outside these processes. To change and challenge power needs spiky activism, and, in the end the threat or reality of revolution, to directly push and pull the leavers. This is empowerment, they don’t talk or think about this at all.

Looking round the room I can’t see any activist affinity groups forming, not a glimpse, powerless people talking about things that matter, it’s not that this does not have a role but on balance this is likely simply more problem than solution. The experts and the academics, the NGO politicos and all their shared views on how to talk to and work with the plebs, that’s the real people outside the walls of the collage.

The guy talking about trust interested me. Then there was the guy who went off script, who, was kind of inspiring, what would more of this look like? The language guy at the end was OK, words do matter and can be used as levers of power, this is affective fluffy activism. And the final point, that the #mainstreaming is not a natural block on the far right, is scarily true.

humm over all interesting, a little food for thought, but likely an unhealthy balance of both activism and academic blocking. The challenge is bridging the gap between intellectual dialogue and on-the-ground activism. How do we push that these conversations lead to actions that can actually “pull the levers” of power, rather than simply talking about what needs to be done at best or at worst #blocking by #mainstreaming #blinded dogma? This balance is vital, and is missing completely.

What can we do.

Socialhub needs rebooting as grassroots, its drifting

What went wrong with this is a classic case of the tension between grassroots ideals and the pressure of existing within a larger system that is fundamentally at odds with those ideals. The #fediverse, along with other #openweb movements, succeeds in small, meaningful ways but struggles to scale in a world built on capitalist structures, centralization, and competition. This tension is particularly evident in how projects, despite being technologically sound and #4opens, ideologically aligned with decentralization and openness, gets bogged down in internal messes, conflicts, miscommunication, leading to fragmentation. The messy social side, neglected in tech projects, ends up undermining the success of the broader mission. People focus on code but forget about the human aspects like collaboration, motivation, and building long-term trust, which are equally essential.

As I suggested, the idea to codify some form of “netiquette” or community values, inspired by the #fluffy and #spiky traditions of past projects, is crucial. If we don’t address these human and social issues, the technology alone will not be enough. The problem is that by default these communities don’t prioritize this, and that’s where the breakdown occurs. What we have now is that the fediverse’s very existence is a victory, but that doesn’t mean the battle is over. The grassroots growth, driven by passion rather than profit, shows that alternatives to #dotcons capitalist, centralized tech are possible, but in-till we find a way to address the underlying social fracture, gatekeeping, burnout, #blocking and conflicts, we’ll continue to push the same mess.

The victory is not in “winning” in capitalist terms, but in maintaining spaces where alternatives can thrive and where people can connect based on shared #4opens values, rather than imposed structures. The real challenge is to keep these spaces open, resilient, and focused, for this to balance we need to address not just the tech, but the people behind it. We could, and should reboot #socialhub to be this space, It’s where it started, and did a good job for a while.

Or not, but it would be good to stop the drift.

We need to reclaim focus and energy wasted on current failing systems

Parasite #NGO and #fashionista tech

“But the principal objection will doubtless refer to the plain language used. My excuse, if indeed excuse be needed for saying just what I mean, is, that it is impossible to clothe in delicate terms the intolerable nastiness which I expose, and at the same time to press the truth home to those who are most in need of it; I might as well talk to the winds as veil my ideas in sweet phrases when addressing people who it seems cannot descry the presence of corruption until it is held in all its putridity under their very nostrils.”

On the of alt-tech path, I’ve been navigating this messy terrain of decentralized, grassroots technology for a long time. From this experience, I can say with some authority that we have taken a step away from the current mess with the growing #activertypub open web reboot. But we still need to mediate some of the ongoing #fashionistas #blocking, which is not helping us compost this mess into fertile soil for the fresh shoots of alternative technology that we so desperately need. This ongoing mess needs more composting, if we leave this in place to continue down this path, we risk strangling the growth we’re trying to cultivate.

The #4opens is a useful tool to recognizing the parasite #NGO and #Fashernista tech projects, that we keep stumbling over. The way genuinely grassroots tech projects—those born from communities, those driven by necessity and vision—are repeatedly being pushed aside by parasite tech projects. These feed from our grassroots efforts, taking the buzzwords and aesthetics without understanding or respecting the underlying principles and socially embedded paths.

This isn’t a fringe occurrence; it’s a pattern that has repeated itself over the last 30 years in meany cases I’ve come across. From social media alternatives to community-focused platforms, time and again, well-intentioned grassroots efforts are overshadowed by the glossy, polished facades of #VC funded or #NGO-backed, fashion-driven tech initiatives that lack, depth and commitment to the actual communities they purport to serve. These projects can be seen as they are more concerned with optics, funding, and their own visibility than with fostering genuine, sustainable alternatives.

There is a role for the #4opens in composting this #techshit, this is a framework that helps to expose and compost this kind of mess at its source. For those unfamiliar, the #4opens are:

Open Data: Data must be accessible, reusable, and modifiable.
Open Source: Code should be freely available for anyone to use, modify, and share.
Open Standards: Interoperability is key; data and code should work together, not against each other.
Open Process: The decision-making process should be transparent and inclusive, not hidden behind closed doors.

By applying the #4opens in grassroots tech projects, we can help to make visible the manipulations and shortfalls of parasitic NGO and fashernista power grabs. This works best when the process is open, so people see who is contributing to the ecosystem and who is simply feeding off it. This visibility is crucial because, without it, these actors are allowed to thrive unchecked, feeding off our work and energy while providing little in return. The open process serves as a powerful tool to expose those who claim to be fostering change but are merely replicating the same hierarchical and closed structures that led us into the current tech mess. It’s about shining a light on the hidden agendas and pushing for accountability and transparency in what this reveals.

How can our #NGO crew actually help? This is harder than it seems as the is strong #blocking to overcome, so the first step is overcoming this blocking, need ideas please?

My idea: Celebrate the mess, understanding that change is messy, and in this mess that new ideas form, where unexpected connections are made, and where real, lasting change takes root. We need to change and challenge the world dominated by the #dotcons and take our alternatives out of the hands of stale paths of dead-end NGO and fashernista tech. We do need composting as a regenerative path.

Motivation for moving away from this mess. The fact that people are rebooting the #openweb by building the #fediverse in a #DIY, grassroots way, without millions in VC funding, is one of the most remarkable feats of contemporary digital resistance. It’s not about “winning” in the capitalist sense—dominating the market, scaling endlessly, or achieving monopoly status in the image of the #dotcons and big tech path. The fediverse powerful from being built on #4opens principles of decentralization, community effort, it’s a native path, outside the norms that capitalism dictates to us as essential.

#NGO platforms like #Bluesky can be fertilised by $12 million in backing and a fully-paid team, the fediverse is growing grassroots from the ground up. It’s powered by people and communities working in their spare time, without corporate salaries and benefits. The coding and creating is driven by belief and belonging, not because a corporation paying to hit growth targets. That’s a different motivation, and it has strength.

The thing we need to see here is that the fediverse exists and thrives, standing as a living counter culture to the idea of competition, capital and centralized control. It’s running against the grain of what’s considered “necessary” in tech, it’s rewriting the rules back to the “native” #openweb path. This openweb reboot shows that people can build non #mainstreaming alternatives, with no paywalls, no ad-tracking, no surveillance, just open collaboration and shared values.

That it’s running at all, while not on the capitalism’s, path and ignoring its “rules”, is the victory. It doesn’t have to become the dominant social media platform. It’s already proved that another way is possible. And that, in itself, is a powerful statement that we need to build from #OMN

The Activist History of the Web: Lessons we can learn

Navigating the Trolls

There is a shifting of social and political paths underway, we will have a move to the left or the right, the centre path has made itself irrelevant through, with not having any valid path to mediate, growing social divisions and ecological breakdown. On the left in our efforts to find meaningful change, we often encounter the phenomenon of “trolling” a problem that has become more prevalent and divisive in recent years. The trolls, emboldened by the anonymity and reach of the #dotcons, try to act as gatekeepers of thought, determined to shut down any ideas or alternatives that fall outside their narrow, and often mean-spirited, views of the world. No matter which political ideology they think they are pushing, this is a right-wing path driven by fear and the need for control. It can be useful to look at these individuals as being drawn from two distinct but overlapping groups: #geekproblem and #fashionista.

The geekproblem, is normally a technical path, but on the social side they often approach activism with a rigid mindset, fixated on technological solutions or unthinking, thus #blinded ideological frameworks. These people are generally well-versed in their specialized areas – be it coding, digital security, or political theory – but are quick to dismiss any ideas that don’t conform to their existing dogmatic and blinded beliefs. Pushing themselves as guardians of “the truth” or the “right way”, but this is from their world they can see, and thus way to often so narrow as to be irrelevant in the messy world we actually live in and have to navigate our way through.

This attitude manifests as trolling behaviour, attacking, undermining, and deriding people who suggest different approaches and alternatives. They forget that the goal is not to dominate the conversation, but to build a collective path that embraces diversity and complexity. Their (blinded) rigidity becomes a barrier to experimentation and cooperation, stifling the messy but working solutions we desperately need.

On the other #blocking path, we have the #fashionistas who are more concerned with appearances, trends, and social currency within activist spaces and wider #mainstreaming society. This group prioritizes being seen as part of the “right” movements, using the “right” language, or following the “right” trends over actually engaging in real meaningful, substantive work. They engage in social gatekeeping, where deviations from the accepted norms or language lead to ostracization and public shaming. This too is trolling, shutting down anything that is outside their blind #deathcult fed #stupidindividualism. Adding to the mess, not composting it, unconsciously replicate the exclusionary tactics they sometimes claim to fight against, creating a culture of fear and conformity instead of openness, debate and the needed paths of diversity.

The consequence of this is the current lack of alternatives, the stifling mess where any alternative outside narrow definitions is attacked, ridiculed, then ignored. This prevents the growth of diverse solutions by marginalizing, then #blocking voices that think differently, and ultimately reinforces the status quo. In effect, the trolls on the internet, whether consciously or unconsciously, are blocking the change and challenge we need. This is a very right-wing path, what ever you might like to call this.

The sad and bad paradox is that these groups can share a genuine desire for social justice and systemic change, yet the inadequacy of their behaviour serves to uphold the paths and systems of oppression and exclusion they seek to dismantle. Trolling thrives on conflict and negativity, which feeds this mess so they can feed off it, it’s a nasty and negative circle.

What paths can we take? How do we move beyond this mess?

We can try and mediate this by focusing on compassionate communication, listening without instant judgment, speaking with some empathy, and seeking to understand rather than only to dominate—we can create spaces that are more inclusive and productive to find path to disagree without being disagreeable. Are we shutting down ideas too quickly? Are we dismissing people who don’t fit neatly into our ideological boxes? By staying open to self-critique, we can prevent ourselves from falling into the trap of this kind of narrow thinking. We can substance this path by building communities that have deepening roots in mutual aid and support.

To sustain these communities we need to focus on concrete actions, not only words, both the #geekproblem and #fashernista paths get bogged down in theoretical debates or performative displays of activism. Instead, we prioritize concrete actions that make tangible differences in our communities, whether through, building alternative networks to create spaces for messy dialogue and collaboration.

A first important step is to move outside the bindings of the dotcons, this is basic, the current internet infrastructure, dominated by social media giants (the #dotcons), is designed to amplify division, outrage, and addiction. To start to build meaningful alternatives, we need to step away from these platforms and cultivate the #openweb—decentralized, community-driven paths where we can experiment with new forms of social organization and communication.

For the last 20 years the has been a historic project, the #OMN, that is based on a culture that values diverse approaches, where multiple strategies and ideas can coexist, and where there is room for trial and error. To do this project requires a fundamental shift in an affinity group to move from rigid dogmas to a more flexible, #4opens approaches that encourage learning from the grassroot history mistakes and successes alike.

We can compost the negativity—the trolling, the rigid thinking, the performative posturing—to find fertile ground for new ideas to grow. To keep on this path we must remain open to different possibilities, willing to take risks, and courageous enough to challenge not just the status quo, but also ourselves. The trolls will always be there, but we don’t have to feed them. Instead, let’s focus on creating the world we want to see. The humanistic adventure in social technology, an Open Media Network of diverse voices and ideas. Let’s embrace the mess, compost it, and use it to grow something new. The path is open, and it can be a more happy one.

https://opencollective.com/open-media-network

The victimhood narrative needs composting

The current state of discourse, particularly the ways in which left and right ideologies, have become so intertwined and confused that it’s difficult for people to distinguish between them. This post critiques the tendency of both sides to adopt a “victimhood narrative,” which is both unproductive and disempowering.

The mess we have made in modern “thinking” and action among some people is to blindly reject critique and instead frame themselves as victims of persecution. This defensive posture, adopted by narcissists, is a path of refusal of engagement in the meaningful exchange of ideas, essential to intellectual growth and social progress. Rather than seeing criticism as an opportunity to refine their arguments or reconsider their positions, these people construct a storey where they are instead under attack. This narrative of victimhood is powerful because it taps into broader societal fears—of being silenced, of losing freedom of expression, of falling prey to what they perceive as the tyranny of the majority, in the end of being bullied. It’s the #stupidindividualism I talk about a lot, playing itself out as broken social psychology.

This #blocking of criticism is problematic because it shuts down the possibility of constructive dialogue. Instead of growing spaces where ideas can be debated and challenged on their merits, this path creates a polarized environment where any dissent is viewed as an assault on personal freedom. This is antithetical to the path of intellectual inquiry, which thrives on the back-and-forth exchange of ideas, even when those ideas are uncomfortable or challenging. The blocking of discourse leads to social stagnation, when individuals or groups refuse to engage with criticism, they insulate themselves from the feedback that leads to the improvement of the paths they take in life. In doing so, they become increasingly disconnected from reality, trapped in echo chambers where their views are continually reinforced by the current mess without question. This in part is why we worshipped a #deathcult for the last 40 years.

This #mainstreaming is making a very nasty mess of the current paths, when those who grab and hold positions of influence and authority dismiss criticism as persecution, they fail to address the urgent substantive issues. Contributing to a culture of, conformity, fear and anti-intellectualism, the bullied becoming the bullies is an old story. This growth of the culture, that disdains critical thinking, thus shapes a preference for simplistic, comforting narratives over complex, sometimes uncomfortable truths, is the path to #fascism so good to focus on this messy we think of as “common sense”, it’s a path we need to step away from.

The current generation are far down the path of “political correctness” which is used as a tool by those who feel their ideas are under siege. On this path the term is often misleading, while there are instances where concerns about offending others may lead to excessive caution in discourse, the path of political correctness is frequently used as a catch-all to block any challenge to entrenched viewpoints. This misuse of the concept creates a false dichotomy: either you are committed to free expression and thus opposed to political correctness, or you are a part of the “mob” enforcing a narrow orthodoxy. In reality, the situation is far more messy. Engaging with criticism and being open to changing one’s views are not signs of weakness or conformity, but of simple integrity.

To move beyond this mess, we need to be willing to listen to criticism, to consider the validity of opposing viewpoints, and to refine our ideas and paths in light of fresh views and differing perspectives. A collaborative process aimed at discovering truth and advancing understanding. By growing the space where criticism is not seen as persecution but as an essential part of the social process, Intellectual discourse should not be a battlefield where ideas are either victoriously defended or ruthlessly attacked, let’s compost the mess, not burn it to ashes please.

We need spaces for this to happen https://opencollective.com/open-media-network please support this native #4opens path, thanks.

UPDATE (draft)

There are strong personal and social forces pushing back the change and challenge we need to live better, more interesting and for furfilling lives. One of the strong “personal” issues is the role of present-moment emotional discomfort in shaping life decisions. Many people, unconsciously, allow short-term emotional anxiety, fear, or discomfort to influence decisions that have long-term consequences. This tendency is rooted in our evolutionary biology, cognitive biases, and societal conditioning.

The role of emotional discomfort in decision-making, from an evolutionary point of view, is that humans have developed a natural aversion to discomfort and pain because these sensations signal danger or threat. Our ancestors who were more attuned to immediate discomfort were more likely to survive. As a result, our brains are wired to avoid pain and seek pleasure, even if this means making decisions that only offer short-term relief. Cognitive biases, is a bias that leads people to prioritize immediate rewards or relief over long-term benefits. This bias often makes us choose a less optimal path simply because it feels better at the moment. This alongside loss aversion makes us more sensitive to potential losses than to equivalent gains, leads to decisions that are more about avoiding discomfort or the fear of loss than about achieving a positive outcome.

Social and cultural pressure in society rewards decisions that align with immediate success, stability, or the avoidance of failure. This pressures individuals to make choices that conform to societal norms, even if they aren’t aligned with their deeper values or long-term goals. For instance, staying in an unfulfilling job because it’s “safe” or not pursuing a dream due to fear of failure. The impact of anxiety and stress, reduces our ability to think rationally. The consequences, decisions made primarily to minimize present-moment discomfort, lead to a life that feels safe but unfulfilling. When we consistently choose the path of least resistance, we avoid short-term pain, but we miss meaningful experiences, personal growth, and the satisfaction that comes from overcoming challenges. Some psychological strategies to counteract this:

There is the fluffy path of mindfulness, which can help us become more aware of our emotional states without immediately reacting to them. By observing our discomfort without judgment, we can make more deliberate choices.
Long-term vision, a clear alternative vision of our long-term goals helps us resist the temptation to make decisions based on short-term emotional states. By reminding ourselves of the better path, we can weigh the immediate discomfort against the potential long-term benefits.
Reflective decision-making, taking time to reflect on why we are making a particular decision, can reveal whether we are motivated by discomfort avoidance or by values and desires. Simply taking a pause or asking #KISS questions can be valuable in this process.

Developing emotional maturity, allows us to endure discomfort without letting it dictate our paths. On the fluffy path, practices like meditation, therapy, or even facing small challenges intentionally, increases our capacity to tolerate discomfort and reduce its power over our decision-making. On the spiky path, a dose of “fucking shit up” can be liberating in moderation as a healthy balance.

In conclusion, while it’s natural to want to minimize discomfort, it’s a more truthful path to recognize when this desire leads us to make decisions that are not in our actual best interest. By becoming more aware of the influence of present-moment emotional states, we can make more conscious, intentional decisions that align with our deeper “natures”, goals and values, leading to a more fulfilling and authentic life. A first step to any of this is getting off our knees and lifting our heads from worshipping the #deathcult, to see that socially shapes this mess we are a personal part of #KISS

Bogged down in negative criticism, let’s focus on building something better

Myth of the tech genius

When we all moved from the #openweb to the #dotcons 20 years ago, the lies being pushed shaped attention. This imprisonment us in a personal and social mess that we now need to compost. One easy to understand #mainstreaming part of this is the idolization of tech billionaires and the revolting cultural myth that they are inherently geniuses due to their wealth and success. This narrative has allowed figures like Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, and Sam Bankman-Fried to amass power and influence, without scrutiny of the paths they have pushed us down, shielded by their wealth and the public’s willingness to buy into the myth of their genius, this mess pushing has wreaked havoc on businesses, economies, and society.

The myth of the tech genius is an obvious lie, shaped, by the “common sense” belief that wealth equals intellect, especially in the tech industry. Figures like Musk, Zuckerberg, and Bankman-Fried are still celebrated as visionaries by meany people, despite the mess they make. Musk’s disastrous #Twitter acquisition, Zuckerberg’s failed #Metaverse venture, or Bankman-Fried’s crypto fraud—highlight that their “success” stems from our blinded view that plays a role in hiding, privilege, incompetence and ruthless business practices.

This big picture is mirrored in millions of small pictures, in the #geekproblem mess we live through, this has a real economic impact, the idolization of these figures, and the emulation of this has real-world consequences. Their decisions led to huge financial losses, job cuts, and broader societal and ecological disasters, such as the erosion of social bindings failing, the destabilization of democratic processes, and the proliferation of unregulated financial schemes like crypto. The small picture replication, this is a #blocking of any real building of alternatives.

A #fashernista look at this mess, do you think it’s helpful spreading this #dotcons fodder?

The role of media and #mainstreaming society is crucial in perpetuating the myth of the tech genius. By constantly elevating these figures, they give them a platform to push their nasty and flawed visions over us on a global scale. And this feeds through into the millions of small picture messes that shape us.

A powerful reminder of the need to question the narratives we’re sold, especially when it comes to those in positions of power and though who emulate them, A first step is to stop equating wealth with intelligence and moral superiority, this worshipping at the #deathcult is not clever, and not helping you or anyone you care about.

The #openweb – Escaping the Grip of the Algorithm

For meany people, the old #dotcons like #Instagram, #Facebook and #Twitter still dominate their online lives, shaping not only what they see but also how they still think and interact. These platforms, with their complex dark algorithms, offer an addictive experience people find hard to resist. The allure is not just in the content they provide, but in the nature of how that content is delivered – tailored, curated, and designed to keep engagement to the point of dependency.

This dependency on these algorithms has become a digital addiction. This is even more true for the next generation of digital drugs from fallow on generations of #dotcons. The algorithm decides what to show people, shaping perceptions and influencing decisions. Over time, this erodes people’s ability to make choices independently, undermining the freedom that the internet was initially supposed to offer. This loss of autonomy is frightening, as it suggests a surrender of our agency to the invisible hand of the algorithm, which prioritizes engagement in capitalism over well-being.

The Algorithmic trap, how we got here? The business model of these “#closedweb” social media platforms, the #dotcons, is based on addiction. The more time people spend on the platforms, the more data they collect, and the more targeted the ads and “content” becomes, leading to increased profits for the #nastyfew. This cycle creates a powerful incentive for these companies to make their platforms as addictive as possible. The more we rely on them, the more they control us, and the less freedom we have to think and choose for ourselves.

What is particularly messy about this model is how it normalizes digital dependency. For meany people, the idea of switching back to the #openweb, to federated, decentralized social media, where algorithms do not dictate what you see, is unappealing precisely because it does not offer the same instant gratification, fix. These platforms do not feed the addiction in the same way, making them less attractive to those who have grown accustomed to algorithmic curation.

To break free from this spiral, people need digital detoxification, but It’s hard to know how to go about this? This is not just about reducing screen time; it’s about reclaiming the paths to make choices independently of what an algorithm suggests. It’s about learning to engage with content and people on your own terms, rather than being passively fed by a machine designed to keep us hooked.

Driving this mess is our worshipping of the #deathcult for the last 40 years, the social shift towards practices and systems that, while profitable for a few, are destructive for the many. The #dotcons have built their empires on this, creating digital paths that prioritize profit over people, “engagement” over enlightenment. This mess extends beyond social media. It speaks to a broader critique of how our paths in technology and #neoliberal ideology have shaped our lives. #Neoliberalism, with its focus on free markets and strong right-wing social government intervention, seeped into our thinking, making us blind to the ways in which we are being manipulated and controlled. This ideology is so ingrained that it has become “invisible” to most, making it difficult to see any potability of a different path we could take.

To see beyond the ideological wall, we need to help people see the invisible, to recognize the ideological frameworks that shape their perceptions and actions. Many people find it difficult to appreciate perspectives outside their own, particularly when those perspectives challenge deeply held beliefs. This is why so many people are #blocking by dismiss paths that try to explain these concepts from different ideological viewpoints. For those of us who try to view the world through multiple lenses, it can be frustrating to see how limited the #mainstreaming narrative is. With liberal media, pushing a narrow view of the world, that reinforces rather than challenges the status quo.

Activists and thinkers, who have long warned of the dangers, are frequently sidelined or ignored. This is why it’s crucial to keep telling these stories, even if they are not always heard or understood. We must continue to highlight the ways in which our digital lives are being shaped by forces that do not have our best interests at heart. We must strive to make the invisible visible, to reveal the ideological underpinnings of the systems we interact with daily.

This is a needed, but difficult story, the story of digital addiction and the #deathcult. It requires us to confront uncomfortable truths about how we live our lives online and how we’ve allowed ourselves to be manipulated by the tools that were supposed to set us free. That the way we engage with technology is not a matter of personal choice but is shaped by the economic and ideological systems in which we are all a part. It’s a story that needs to be told from multiple perspectives, not just those of the chattering classes or the narrow liberal media. A story that should include the voices of activists, technologists, and everyday people struggling to reclaim humanistic paths.

In the end, if we want to have any future, let alone one that is truly open, decentralized, and free, we need to recognize the dangers of digital addiction and the ideologies that sustain it. We need to support the #openweb and the technologies that empower people rather than control them. This is a first step to break free from the #deathcult mentality, creating an online and offline world that we might like to live in #KISS

How we bridge current #blocking conversations for change and challenge

How we bridge current #blocking conversations for change and challenge

There’s an overwhelming amount of toxic nonsense masquerading as “common sense” in our #mainstreaming dialogue. This isn’t just a small problem; it’s a pervasive issue that stifles genuine conversation and constructive change and challenge we need. The challenge is real, but I urge you to take a moment and resist being part of this “common sense” mess-making. Instead of falling into the trap of repeating the same misguided and very nasty narratives, we collectively critically and consciously need to push against the tide of nasty lazy #blocking thinking.

Building trust in this mess is incredibly difficult. It requires real community and real effort, awareness, and a commitment to seeing beyond the surface-level “common sense” that reinforces the status quo. The mainstreaming dialogue, as it stands, is poison that seeps into our minds and conversations, making it impossible to foster #KISS understanding and collaboration.

This is why we need to change and challenge the current mess. It’s not enough to simply go along with what everyone else is saying or thinking. We need to question, to dig deeper, and to refuse to be complacent in the face of the toxic narratives, dominate our social and political landscapes.

By actively resisting the pull of #mainstreaming and engaging with grassroots ideas critically and compassionately, we begin to carve out a space for authentic, meaningful dialogue. This is the path forward, and it’s essential if we want to build a society that values truth, trust, and progress over shallow consensus and harmful worshiping of the #deathcult in the toxic “common sense” path.

Yes, trust vs parodied #fuckwittery is hard to bridge, the #mainstreaming is poison for this path. I understand it’s hard, but please try, to take a moment, not to be the prat I talk about.

The #openweb – Escaping the Grip of the Algorithm

The Forgotten Story of Social Technology: Why It Matters

All code is ideology solidified into action – most contemporary code is capitalism, this is hardly a surprise if you think about this for a moment. Yes you can try and act on any ideology on top of this code, but the outcome and assumptions are preprogramed, with this in mind let’s look at a path outside this mess. In the original “native” digital wilderness of the #openweb, our use of technology paths were seen as something esoteric—a domain of hackers, activists, and tech-savvy individuals who speak in code and operate in the margins. But beneath this perception lies a fundamental truth: social technology is not just for the few; it’s for everyone. It’s about how we connect, share, and build communities. And this matters more now than ever.

In the early days there was the path of open connections, this story begins in the early 2000s an example is with the rise of #Indymedia, a global network of independent media centres that emerged as a response to corporate control over #traditionalmedia. Indymedia pioneered social technology, using the internet to democratize information and give voice to those silenced by traditional media. Indymedia wasn’t only about the content; it was more the community of people. This new social reality was revolutionary because it allowed communities to create their own paths to share media in wider public spaces without relying on corporate platforms. It was a glimpse into what the internet could be— decentralized, user and community controlled space for collaboration and free expression.

For many activists, Indymedia was more than a tool; it was a lifeline. It provided a way to organize, mobilize, and communicate outside the #blocking and watchful eyes of governments and corporations. But the significance of Indymedia and similar projects extended far beyond this activism. They represented a different vision of what the internet could be—a vision that prioritized openness, community control, and freedom over profit and surveillance.

The rise of the dotcons and betrayal of the openweb. As the internet grew, so did the corporate interest in controlling it. Enter the #dotcons the tech giants like Google, Facebook, and Amazon, which have come to dominate the online landscape. These corporations offered free services that were easy to use and quickly became ubiquitous. But there was a catch: these services were free because the users themselves were the product. The #dotcons built their empires by harvesting data, selling ads, and creating siloes that encouraged mindless scrolling rather than meaningful interaction. The openweb—the vision of a decentralized, user-controlled internet—was quickly replaced by a walled garden of corporate platforms that prioritized profit and control over people and #DIY.

This shift had implications, it wasn’t only about losing control over shared digital commons, it was about losing control over our communities, our communications, and our society. The internet, once a space for creativity and intervention, become a tool of surveillance and manipulation. The promise of social technology as a force for social good was eroded by the platforms that had once seemed so empowering.

The #deathcult is a system that consumes everything. The ideology that underpins the dotcons and the broader #neoliberal system they are part of. This path of endless growth, profit at any cost, and the concentration of power in the hands of a few. An ideology that consumes everything in its path—communities, environments, and even our own sense of self.

This is not only a problem for activists; it’s a problem for everyone. The #deathcult turns us into consumers rather than citizens, prioritizing #stupidindividualism over community and short-term profit over long-term sustainability. An ideology that leads us to the environmental crisis, the erosion of social trust, and the ending of democracies. For anarchists and activists, the deathcult is the enemy to be fought. But for the average person, it’s the water we swim in—the invisible system that shapes our lives in ways we don’t even notice. Understanding this is crucial if we are to reclaim the internet, our communities, and any liveable future.

Reclaiming the Commons is a role for the #4opens, if the deathcult is the problem, then the 4opens is part of the solution. The #4opens—opendata, opencode, openprocess, and openstandards—are #KISS paths to build a better internet. These principles are not only for activists; they are for anyone who sees the need to empower community and the importance of basic democracy.

Open data means that information should be accessible to all, not hoarded by corporations. Open code means that software should be transparent and modifiable, not a black box controlled by a few. Open governance means that decisions about how platforms are run should be made by the community, not imposed from above. And open standards mean that different systems should be able to work together, rather than being locked into proprietary formats. These principles are the foundation of the #openweb that empowers people, fosters creativity, and builds communities, the foundation of a good society.

The Open Media Network (#OMN) is a path to create a native digital network based on the #4opens. The OMN is not only a technical project; it’s a social one. It’s about spaces where people can connect, share, and build without being subject to the whims of corporate controle. It’s a reboot of the original web, learning from projects like #indymedia. The #OMN is a response to the failures of our use of the #dotcons and the worshipping of the deathcult. A way to reclaim the internet as a tool of good, rather than a weapon of control. It’s a way to rebuild the commons, the shared resources and spaces that are core to the path of the healthy society.

For progressives and anarchists, the OMN is a path we need to take to create the world we might want to see, where power is decentralized, and communities have control over their destinies. But for everyone else, the OMN is a way to take back what has been lost in the corporate takeover of the internet. It’s a way to reconnect the original promise of the internet as free expression, collaboration, and community.

Why this social technology matters, at its core, social technology is how we connect with each other. It’s the tools we use to build relationships, share information, and create communities. These things matter for everyone, not only activists or anarchists. In the current mess dominated by corporate platforms, we blindly worship the deathcult where in the openweb native path of social technology offers a way to reclaim our agency away from this mess. It offers a way to build systems that work for us, rather than against us. The story of social technology, as told by Hamish Campbell on this site, is a story of hope and possibility. It’s a story of what the internet could have been—and what it still can be.

The journey won’t be easy, but it is a journey worth taking. In the end, the #openweb is about more than technology; it’s about the kind of society we want to build, and the kind of people we want to be #KISS

Control in Tech Culture

The 20th century was marked by significant technological and scientific advancements, alongside violent conflicts. As we move through the 21st century, the nature of these conflicts is shifting. The struggle is increasingly between humanity and nature, with dire consequences if we continue down our current path. Environmental degradation and climate change are no longer side effects, but central challenges that must be addressed. We need to find paths to move off the current paths, there are assumptions that are #blocking this needed move, one is in technology and its assumptions.

This #geekproblem has been inherited from past era’s in our computer architectures and the broader tech culture that has an ingrained concept of control. This control, hardcoded into systems and frameworks, poses an unspoken problem within many geek paths. Addressing this issue is crucial for understanding the broader implications and possibilities of grassroots #openweb tech activism as a path out of the current social and technical mess.

The Control paradigm in tech, from the foundations of computing, control has been a central theme. Systems are designed to operate under strict protocols, ensuring reliability, security, and efficiency. This paradigm, while effective in technological contexts, is inadvertently extend into social dynamics within tech communities. Control in tech is not just about managing systems; it also shapes interactions, hierarchies, and decision-making processes.

Unconscious participation in control structures, in tech communities, is unconsciously embedded in social groups that perpetuate this control paradigm. It’s essential to recognize that this isn’t a personal failing but a reflection of broader cultural trends. The challenge lies in identifying and addressing these unconscious patterns to foster more open, collaborative, and equitable environments.

The Keep It Simple, Stupid (#KISS) principle is a valuable tool for analysing generalist issues within our shared cultures. By simplifying complex problems, we can better understand the dynamics at play and develop more effective solutions. Applying the KISS principle to tech activism helps to demystify the control paradigm and its impact on our communities.

This blog is dedicated to exploring alternative paths that we can take to address these issues. By grassroots #openweb tech activism to mitigate the destructive patterns of control and build more sustainable and equitable paths. To promote decentralized technologies to empower people and communities, reducing reliance on centralized control structures.

#4opens emphasizes the importance of open-source software, to encourages collaboration, transparency, and shared ownership and community building. We need to fostering strong, inclusive communities that prioritize collective well-being over hierarchical control. We need to shift to environmental stewardship and ecological consciousness in our tech development and usage, recognizing the interconnectedness of human and environmental health in the tools we use.

This path requires a fundamental shift in how we approach technology and control. By embracing the #openweb and grassroots activism, we can create resilient, inclusive, and sustainable technological systems. This is not just a technical challenge but a cultural and ethical one.

#OMN #indymediaback #OGB #makeinghistory #visionontv #4opens