Tag: fashionista

State Funding of #FOSS and Open Source: Is it a Good Idea or a Bad Idea?

The questioning over state funding of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and open-source initiatives revolves around invisible ideological debates about benefits and drawbacks. Let’s look at this from a few specific examples: #NLnet, #NGI, and the European Union (#EU), to understanding the implications and effectiveness of this funding path.

  • The #NLnet Foundation is a notable example of an organization that provides funding to open-source projects. Supported by private and public funds, including significant contributions from the #EU, NLnet focuses on promoting a free, open, and secure internet.
  • The #NGI initiative, funded by the #EU, aims to shape the development of the internet of tomorrow. By supporting a range of open-source projects, NGI tries to foster innovation, privacy, and security. It emphasizes human-concentric technology, ensuring that the future internet respects humanistic values and needs.
  • The #EU has been a significant proponent of FOSS, providing funding through programs such as Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe. The EU’s supports digital sovereignty, reduce dependency on non-European technologies through promoting open standards.

The is some democratization as these state-funded FOSS projects ensure software is accessible to wider groups, thus reducing the digital divide. For instance, NGI-funded projects are supposed to focus on inclusivity and user empowerment. At best, this transparency brings public overview to these processes.

There are some economic benefits and cost savings in using and supporting FOSS instead of expensive proprietary software. Funding initiatives like NGI stimulate innovation by allowing developers to build upon existing open-source projects, fostering a collaborative environment. Though, there are unspoken issues of sustainability in a pure capitalist path, thus the question of balance in state funding.

Open-source software allows for independent security audits, reducing the risk of vulnerabilities. The EU’s investment in secure communication tools underlines this advantage. Reducing reliance on a few large proprietaries #dotcons software vendors enhances national security and control. The EU’s support for open-source projects aims to bolster humanistic digital sovereignty.

For example, #NLnet’s diverse (though #geekproblem) funding portfolio highlights this limited community-driven development. The collaboration between public institutions, the private sector, and community contributors helps #NGI projects bring together diverse stakeholders to work on common goals. #FOSS projects thrive on community contributions, leading to continuous improvement and support and thus in theory community needs, though due to the dogmatic #geekproblem this is currently failing.

Funding Continuity: Projects become dependent on government funding, which currently is not stable or continuous. For example, sudden policy shifts in the EU affect long-term project sustainability. Without a sustainable funding, FOSS projects struggle with long-term maintenance and support.

Most #FOSS projects are too idiosyncratic to meet quality #UX standards. Thus, the current #geekproblem dominated process means that state funding inadvertently support meany unusable and thus pointless, subpar projects. Effective diversity and oversight of these mechanisms are crucial to mitigate this failing path.

Government involvement leads to bureaucracy, slowing down and ossifying development cycles, currently we do not work though this path well, The balance between oversight, diversity and agility is critical. With the #EU path this is a huge problem leading to almost all the current funding bring poured down the drain.

For #mainstreaming capitalism the issue of “Market Distortion”, the idea of competition raises the issue of state funding distorting “market” dogmas to disadvantage private companies and startups that don’t receive government support. For instance, EU funding can overshadow smaller #dotcons, capitalist thinking sees this as a risk that government-backed projects might stifle innovation by shaping the market landscape.

Political and ideological biases influence which projects receive funding, this is currently pushing a #blocking of the needed “native” #openweb path. How to move past this to ensuring diversity and “impartiality” in funding decisions need real work. How can we shift this “common sense” focus that government priorities do not align with the wider needs of the #openweb community and end-users. Aligning funding priorities with community needs is needed to address this concern, how can we make this happen with funding like #NLnet and #NGI?

To sum up, #NLnet are doing some good work, but this is focused on feeding the #geekproblem and building #fashionista careers, evern then on balance they do a better job than most. Then the wider #NGI funding is going into the #dotcons and #NGO mess, thus being poured directly down the drain. Over all, it’s fantastic that the #EU is funding the #openweb even if it is doing it very badly by funding very little that is native or useful.

Conclusion, state funding for FOSS and open-source initiatives, in our examples #NLnet, #NGI, and the #EU, has potential for creating real change and challenge, but this path presents both opportunities and challenges. When implemented thoughtfully, it can foster “native” paths, innovation, reduce costs, and enhance community and security to challenge the current worshipping of the #deathcults by our widespread use of the #dotcons. The question is the will and understanding to balancing this path to ensures that state funding positively contributes to the #4opens FOSS ecosystem, driving forward a free, open digital future or just leads to the capitalistic criticism of waste and distortion? At best and at worst, we see some real change and a lot of poring funding down the drain to feed some #geekproblem and build the careers of a few #fashernistas

The is much to compost in the current mess, can we get funding for shovels please #OMN

Indymedia based on the #OMN framework

The original #Indymedia network was a vibrant platform for decentralized grassroots media. It gave voice to those ignored by corporate media and built a culture of open publishing and collaboration. But over time it succumbed to both internal and external pressures.

Why reboot #Indymedia now? And how can we spread the understanding of why we need to do this. But, before we can revive the project, we need to face those failures honestly – and learn from them.

Why did Indymedia decline?

  • Internal conflicts – tribalism, ego, and power politics fractured unity.
  • Divergent visions – competing goals and methods led to fragmentation.
  • External pressures – surveillance, repression, and legal harassment weakened the network.
  • Technological change – rapid shifts in digital media outpaced Indymedia’s adaptability.
  • Sustainability problems – financial and operational support was always fragile.
  • Centralization vs. decentralization – endless tension between autonomy and coherence sapped energy.

These dynamics weren’t unique to Indymedia. They mirror the wider decline of radical alt-media in the face of #dotcons and the #deathcult of neoliberal “common sense.” So what is #IndymediaBack? It’s a project about rekindling what worked while composting what didn’t. It is rooted in the principles that once made Indymedia a powerful force:

  • Trust-based publishing
  • Do-ocracy
  • Anti-authoritarianism

But this time, we pair those values with modern tools and lessons learned.

The role of #OMN framework is central to this reboot. It brings with it:

  • Openness and collaboration
  • Decentralization by design

Objectives of the reboot:

  • Re-establish open publishing flows – grassroots publishing, ensuring diverse voices are heard.
  • Strengthen decentralized structures – prevent power concentration while empowering local autonomy.
  • Implement modern standards – adopt protocols like #ActivityPub to improve functionality and widen news flows.
  • Avoid past mistakes – use clear governance and messy consensus to counter tribalism and power politics.
  • Promote sustainability – develop financial and operational models that keep the network alive long-term.

Strategies for Revival:

  • Adopt a #NothingNew policy – stick to the original workflows and ethos, but update them to meet today’s realities.
  • Build affinity groups – working groups to tackle specific issues and reach consensus on direction.
  • Emphasize the #4opens – open source, open data, open standards, open processes — to guarantee transparency and inclusivity.

Expected Outcomes:

  • A resilient and inclusive network of sites – decentralized and open, able to withstand pressures from within and without.
  • Diverse, vibrant media content – a rich tapestry of perspectives beyond the mainstream.
  • Sustainable operations – financial and organizational resilience to endure over time.
  • Community-driven governance – messy consensus and grassroots decision-making, not top-down control.

Conclusion, this is not just about restoring what was lost. It is about composting the failures and growing something new, a living network that can adapt to future challenges while staying true to its radical, open, grassroots beginnings.

Thinking about news on the #fediverse

The Solution: Embrace the #4opens

We can’t keep repeating the same #TechShit over and over again. #TechCurn is a dead end.
The #OMN is the only positive path I know forward.

#Mainstreaming #fashernistas are dangerously consumptive. Our alt #fashernistas are utterly pointless. We need to disrupt social norms and make #4opens fashionable to salvage any value from these people and pull them out of their vacuous existence.

From a grassroot #DIY #tech perspective, we are witnessing a problematic trend among many of our #openweb #fashionistas. Their impact is negligible, but the space they occupy stifles genuine progress. To combat this, we need to address the overwhelming #techshit and curb the ongoing #techchurn. The Problem, the centrist #mainstreaming approach is failing us, and the persistence of these misguided efforts is disheartening. We need to find a practical path forward, moving beyond pity and hate to actionable solutions. We need to open up this path.

The Solution: Embrace the #4opens

The #4opens—open source, open data, open standards, and open processes—provide a foundational framework for building sustainable and effective projects. By prioritizing these principles, we can cultivate a thriving “native” ecosystem.

Action Plan
* Education and Awareness: Promote understanding of the #4opens and their importance. This can be achieved through workshops, online tutorials, and community discussions.
* Community Building: Foster a community of like-minded people committed to the #openweb, create paths for collaboration.
* Project Audits: Regularly evaluate projects to “judge” they adhere to the #4opens. Offer support and guidance for those struggling to meet these basic standards.
* Highlight Success Stories: Showcase projects that exemplify the #4opens. Use these as case studies to inspire and guide others.
* Address Tech Churn: Identify and mitigate the causes of #techchurn. This involves simplifying tools, improving documentation, and mentorship to grow contributors.
* Challenge #Fashionista Trends: Actively push back against the unthinking pursuit of new trends that do not align with #KISS #openweb values. Advocate for stability and sustainability rather than novelty.
* Policy Advocacy: Work towards policies that support the culture of the #openweb at organizational and governmental levels. This includes promoting open licensing, funding open projects, and ensuring access to open standards.

Moving Forward, we need to gather to reclaim the space occupied by ineffective projects and redirect it towards meaningful initiatives. By committing to the #4opens and fostering a supportive community, we can overcome the current challenges and build a more resilient and humanistic path. It won’t be simple to overcome the inertia of the #mainstreaming to create lasting, positive change in the #openweb path. Are you ready to push to make this happen? Let’s work together to navigate this “common sense” mess and find a useful path forward, please.

Definitions, that might help

This is from the view of progressive, grassroots and Alt media in the UK:

Silo, definition: Closed data systems hoarding information. Impact: Data vanishes when projects end, diminishing the effectiveness of alternative media. Most alt/grassroots media projects are silos, capturing data without open licensing for reuse.

Portal, definition: Attempts to be the dominant site, locking users into their ecosystem. Impact: Builds projects that trap users, contrary to the #openweb’s logic. In alt/grassroots media, this resembles a one-party state approach of the 20th century.

#Dotcons, definition: For-profit data silos and pseudo-networked portals. Impact: Many alt media projects mimic #dotcons, aspiring to their closed models.

Link, definition: Fundamental to the #openweb, giving content value. Impact: The absence of linking in alt media reduces the content’s value.

#Activitypub, definition: is a protocol and open standard for decentralized networking, a tool for commons building. Impact: this is growing in use.

#RSS, definition: An open web standard that adds value through data sharing. Impact: RSS is underutilized in alt media, overshadowed by silo and portal models.

Geek Culture, definition: A subculture focused on control and technical solutions. Impact: Often closes open projects, contributing to the failure of alt media initiatives, ca use the hashtag #geekproblem

#Fashionista Culture, definition: An unthinking pursuit of innovation and conformity. Impact: Churns through alt/grassroots projects, preventing them from growing.

#NGO, definition: Bureaucratic entities consuming resources. Impact: Push agendas that overshadow grassroots initiatives, often invisibly counterproductive.

Network, definition: Both technical (wires, frequencies) and mutual aid (diversity of strategy).
Impact: Essential for alt media but underutilized.

#4opens, definition: Open source, open data, open standards, open process. Impact: Exemplified by projects like Wikipedia; foundational to just and effective media projects.

To sum, up, we are still in the process of moving away from the mess of most UK alt/grassroots media projects, who are focused on silos, on capturing data and users rather than linking and sharing to build commons. Emphasizing the #4opens and fostering a culture of linking and openness help’s to break this cycle and build a more interconnected and effective alternative media landscape.

This post is based off this https://hamishcampbell.com/looking-at-the-tech-and-organising-of-uk-alt-grassroots-media/

How did we get into such a mess?

The mess is a result of the socioeconomic outcome of the widespread adoption of #neoliberal policies and ideology. Neoliberal theorists like Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman developed and promoted the ideas, emphasizing competition and market-based solutions to social and economic problems. Politicians like Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan implemented neoliberal policies on a large scale, fundamentally altering over the last 40 years the role of government and the structure of our society.

Business interests, pushed neoliberal policies to restore their power and wealth, which had diminished during the era of “progressive” liberalism. Think tanks, academic institutions and university economics departments played a role in spreading and legitimizing neoliberal ideas.

The economic crises of the 1970s, stagflation and oil shocks, created an opening for neoliberal policies to be pushed as an alternative to existing redistributive social democratic economic models. This was then taken up by #mainstreaming political parties, including traditionally left-leaning parties, such as Labour in the UK, who pushed the same neoliberal agendas, contributing to the ideology’s total dominance across the political spectrum. The “mess” we are in is not the result of a conspiracy, more the failed #fashionista pushing of ideas, self-interest, and historical circumstances.

Over the last 40 years we have fundamentally altered how people, institutions, and governments see the world and their roles in society. This shift has led to social brake feed by “common sense” #stupidindividualism and market-based destruction of social goods and environment. The “common sense” pervasiveness of neoliberal logic made this thinking difficult to escape, even for people who profess to oppose it. This mess is proving to be a #deathcult in the era of #XR

A tech story

In the #openweb of digital innovation, there is a culture revered for its ingenuity and technical prowess – the hackers of old. Yet, beneath the surface of their achievements lays a problem, one that has led to the downfall of many social tech endeavours: the #geekproblem.

In the early days, hackers were pioneers, pushing the boundaries of what was possible, though as their influence grew, so too did the imbalance within their communities. The projects that thrived, that embodied the principles of openness and collaboration (#4opens), were not only the work of these geeks, but wider diverse affinity groups where social leadership was core.

The projects that flourished had strong social guidance, with the geeks playing one part in the larger diversity. This was a healthy dynamic, with different perspectives and different skills, complemented each other to further common social goals.

However, over time tragedy grew when the geeks seized control of the foundations and the #fashernistas, with their penchant for superficial trends, hijacked the facade. With the geeks at the helm and the fashionistas dictating the direction, the once vibrant projects slowly over time withered and died.

The demise of the #openweb was not a sudden event, this slow and steady decline was orchestrated by those who valued personal agendas and status over collective progress. The geeks, blinded by their technical prowess, failed to recognize the importance of social partnerships, while the fashionistas, eager to climb the ladder of #mainstreaming success, sold out the principles they once claimed to champion.

And so, the legacy of the #openweb was tarnished, its promise of democratized access and decentralized trust, betrayed by those who prioritized their own blinded interests over the “native” common good. Yet, amidst this wreckage, a glimmer of hope remains – a reminder that progressive tech lies not in the hands of the few, but in the collective efforts of all who dare to dream of a better, more humanist world. Let’s try not to make the same mistakes with our current #web1.5 reboot in the #Fediverse, please.

To avoid repeating this mess we need to mediate the tragic reality that within our #fashionista circles, there exists a pervasive sense of hopelessness, a destructive force that accompanies their every endeavour. Their relentless pursuit of trends and their blind devotion to the #deathcult have left a trail of destruction in their wake.

We need to actually use the #4opens project, as a beacon of hope amidst this chaos, a reminder that there is another way forward. Not doing this is leading us on the path to failure, contributing to the ever-growing piles of #techshit.

There’s much to be learned from this cycle of destruction and renewal. It’s time to embrace the lessons of the past and walk a better path, one guided not by the whims of #fashionistas or the allure of the #deathcult please.

#4opens

The problem of fashionistas in activism

The hashtag #fashionistas” typically describes individuals or groups who adopt trends or ideologies in activism, for the sake of appearance or to align themselves with what is currently popular or socially acceptable. In the realm of activism, this phenomenon to often manifests in the behaviour of #NGOs and advocacy organizations who prioritize “chasing the buzzword” over meaningful action.

The problem with “fashionistas” in activism, particularly among NGOs, is the mess they push:

* Superficial Engagement: NGOs adopt trendy causes or issues without any understanding or committing to them. This results in superficial engagement with complex social problems, leading to tokenistic gestures rather than any real substantive change.

* Lack of Authenticity: When prioritize appearing progressive by aligning with popular movements without commitment to the cause, this undermines trust and authenticity within the community.

* Mainstreaming: prioritize activism that is palatable to #mainstreaming audiences and funders, sacrificing radical or grassroots voices in the process. This mainstreaming tendency dilutes the effectiveness of activism and reinforces existing power structures.

* Misaligned Priorities: By chasing buzzwords and trends #fashernistas divert resources and attention away from pressing issues that are less visible or popular but more important. This  perpetuate injustice and inequality in actavist communities.

* Reactive Rather Than Proactive: #Fashionista activism is reactive, responding to the latest trend or crisis rather than addressing systemic issues in a sustained and strategic manner. This leads to short-term gains but fails to create lasting change.

* Rectonery: Adopting trends without a commitment to the underlying values and principles leads to performative activism or “rectonery” – actions that serve to maintain the status quo rather than challenging oppressive systems.

To address the problems of fashionista activism, we need for NGOs and advocacy that prioritize authenticity, long-term commitment, and meaningful engagement with the communities they are a part of. This involves centring the voices of active grassroots groups, challenging #mainstreaming narratives, and pursuing paths that address root causes rather than superficial symptoms. By doing so, activists can work towards creating genuine, transformative change and challenge rather than blindly simply following the latest trend.

Rebooting Indymedia: Restoring the OpenWeb and Grassroots Technology

This site is about, looking at the past and future of “native” grassroots media. In the last three decades, the digital landscape has undergone dramatic changes. I have witnessed its evolution firsthand, working in radical media and engaging with grassroots technology. But this journey hasn’t been without its challenges and setbacks.

The Dawn of the OpenWeb

The early years of the #openweb were a golden age, a time when the power of connectivity and innovation was shared and wielded by people rather than confined to corporate silos, built at a human scale, with real conversations and decisions made not by algorithms or profit-driven entities, but by human beings.

However, those pioneering days of the openweb seem distant now. The landscape rapidly shifted, favouring echo chambers over open forums, transforming the working participatory digital spaces into commercialized pockets designed to commodify our data and society

The Rise and Fall of .Coms

The term #dotcons, inspired by the .com boom, exposes the underlying deceit in this new era of the internet. Companies emerged with the aim of capitalizing on our online presence, turning every click and keystroke into a financial opportunity. Social media platforms like #Facebook -aptly dubbed #Failbook and others have become disasters for both our personal mental health and social construct.

The Encryptionist Agenda

In response to the corporatization of the web, alternative technology, especially within radical grassroots movements, began to focus heavily on encryption. Yet this #encryptionist agenda, instead of growing a true alternative, led us to a dead end. An example #Indymedia, which once stood as a beacon of open, participatory journalism, eventually succumbed to this closed technology approach.

The Plight of Progressive Technology

#Fashionista politics – those which blindly follow trends without questioning the underlying systems – have dominated the progressive tech landscape, often embracing the very platforms that stand contrary to open standards. The ideals that spurred movements and created spaces for change have been eroded, leaving us in a technological quagmire that stifles creativity and any real progress.

Rebuilding from the Roots

Despite these challenges, hope remains for a resurgence of grassroots media. By revisiting the core principles that made #Indymedia a force in its early days, we can steer the movement back on course.

A Simple Federated Network

I consider Oxford IMC, which I co-founded, as a blueprint for this revival. Through a network of trust-based content sharing, we create a federated model that allows information to flow freely yet responsibly.

Think of it as a series of nodes: activist news websites, Mastodon instances, peertube channels, and local blogs, all interlinked by trust and moderated collaboration, governed by a simple yet effective set of controls – including link subscribe, moderate/trusted flow, and rollback functions to maintain the integrity of our content.

Trust First, Moderate Later

By focusing on trust-first networking, where content flows are based on established relationships, we not only streamline communication but also protect against the pitfalls of a closed, controlled web. This approach allows for open, decentralized storytelling, with an organic curation system that respects the diversity and autonomy of each node.

Reclaiming and Reshaping Security

Recognizing the need for secure communication without sacrificing openness, the reboot incorporates both bridges to other #4opens network publishing and guidelines for pseudo-anonymous contributions through Tor.

These measures provide a balanced approach, enabling activists to share their stories without fear of repercussion while maintaining a spirit of openness and community-driven journalism.

Foundations of the Reboot

Central to this reboot are the #PGA hallmarks and the #4opens – open data, open source, open standards, and open process. This framework, informed by the lessons from #Indymedia’s past, will ensure that we do not repeat the same mistakes.

Moreover, by adopting federated databases and leveraging tags and flows of news objects, this network will function as a vibrant, resilient web of news, accessible at different levels and capable of adapting to the ever-changing demands of radical grassroots journalism.

Be Part of the Open Media Reboot

I invite you to join us as we embark on this journey to reclaim our digital commons. If you share the vision for an open, grassroots-powered web, visit http://unite.openworlds.info and contribute your expertise. With a commitment to the #4opens and a collaborative spirit, we can usher in a new era of the Fediverse centred on truth, empowerment, and community.

This is more than a project, it’s a movement. Let’s create a network that stands as a testament to our collective power, one that honors our past achievements while forging a future that lives up to our highest aspirations. Let’s make history, again.

The open web is not just a concept; it’s our birthright. Together, let’s bring it back to life.

This post is a call to action. It’s a bid to revive the original spirit of #Indymedia and extend a hand to those willing to contribute to the future of open, grassroots media.

# Introduction
– Hamish Campbell’s background in grassroots and radical media
– The open web’s early potential for alternative media

# The Failure of Alternative Media
– Rise of big tech like Facebook led to closed and monopolized systems
– Encryptionist agenda went nowhere over the past decade
– Climate crisis shows need for societal alternatives

# The Open Media Network
– Explaining the decentralized federated network model
– Trusted flows of content based on open standards

# Rebooting Indymedia
– Rebuilding the local community news site with focus areas
– Approaches for enabling secure anonymous publishing

# Why Indymedia Failed
– Early successes but internal disputes over openness
– Problems with incompatible customized systems
– Control desires led to user-hostile encryption

# Lessons Learned
– Open standards critical for networks
– Loose flexible processes over rigid bureaucracy
– Explicitly embedding the “four opens” philosophy

# Project Overview
– Building a web of trusted news flows
– Agnostic decentralized network via protocols like ActivityPub
– Get involved to help create alternative media

An Old Video

 

The #hashtags embody a story and world-view

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

The #hashtags embody a story and world-view that are rooted in a progressive and critical perspective on technology and society. They highlight the negative impact of neoliberalism (#deathcult) and consumer capitalism (#fashionista) on society, and promote the original ideals of the World Wide Web and internet culture (#openweb). The #closedweb hashtag critiques the for-profit internet and its social consequences, while the #4opens promote the principles of transparency, collaboration, and sharing in open-source development.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • https://two.compost.digital/ This is the #NGO # fashionista view of the 20-year-old #OMN project, it is full of teenage focus and might be interesting if it LINKED, but it does not, flight and scatter to the wind, more to compost.

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

These projects are all #blocking by occupying space. In this #fashernista path, we do need to see how possessiveness leads to unintended destruction of things we cherish. This reflects a common path of human nature, where love and possession become intertwined, with negative consequences.

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

Our “common sense” paths are often bad:

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

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

Take a moment to think about basics

Take a moment to think about basics: activism/campaigning is about building resistance to the mainstream to change its flow in progressive directions. Were #mainstreaming is about shifting activism to reduce these resistances to the mainstream flow. Thus, it’s good to understand that #mainstreaming is a #NGO agenda to build the jobs of the people involved, and is in turn funded to this end. Good not to get this shit mixed up.

Lifestyle is a way of forming a tribe inside this mainstream flow. The problem for activism is that this old school tribalism is obviously a BLOCK on social change, as looking and talking right are MORE important than being right. Being right would be “resistance” and lifestyle is about going with the counter flow.

On the other hand, there are advantages to “modern” tribal and lifestyle activism – it functions as social glue to hold campaigns together and provides a “uniform” flag to rally round. You notice I do not use words like anarchist, socialist, liberalism here as these have a different role in social change thinking – they are the ideas – the clothing is what I am taking about #fashionista is the hashtag.

#Revolution is about blowing up the flow of the mainstream so it floods into a different path, with much “collateral” damage in the process as we live inside a highly urban complex society. Both paths can be useful, both have costs.

Good not to mix this shit up, let’s build something to compost this mess #OMN

 

Don’t trust the fashionista

Published Date 9/25/17 4:24 PM

Thinking about #Uber and the dysfunction of #Facebook.

It’s time to #reboot many parts of the #openweb With the “visibility” of the failing of #dotcons such as #failbook privacy/obscured agronomic control of you, #uber and the race to the bottom culture.

The will be a plausible “class” of people who come up with convincing sounding solutions, these #fashionista are not part of any solution and are a clear and historical core to our failers in the past.

I understand it’s hard to see the differences of tech projects, what is worth supporting and what not. We have issues from two different directions that have to at least a little understood to have a hope of supporting projects that have the possibility to be part of a real LINKING alt.

* #fashionista thinking/working

* the #geekprobelm

These are opposite side of the same coin.

“A river that needs crossing – On the political side, there is arrogance and ignorance, on the geek side there is naivety and over complexity”

A good first step solution to both is the #4opens

They will dis-empower the worst of the #fashionista thinking by shining light on their actions and mediate to a better outcome the “closing push” of the #geekproblem by keeping the LINKING in place.

Simple and sweet, a first step solution in a hashtag 😉