Feudalism is not a good model of governance, yes I understand this is the norm for #opensource and #freesoftware, but we do need to update to something more relevant at some point.
The #fediverse is a good opertunerty to try democracy, maybe?
Tag: fediverse
A conversation on trust and tech with #OMN projects
Remember the #fedivers is built like this, no geek in their right minds would do this, yet we use it every day
All our existing code is based on #feudalism master (admin) surf (user) this is why it is defenceless vs capitalism (#dotcons)
There have been attempts to build democratic code, early #wikis, think #indymedia
#geekproblem “common sense” shifted them back into feudalism.
We have a hard #BLOCK on democratic code, if you want to change/challenge then this blocking needs to be removed.
The #OMN is a project for this, it’s an uphill battle to bring democracy into our coding.
This is the media project (text needs a update” https://unite.openworlds.info/Open-Media-Network/Open-Media-Network/wiki OFFLINE
Governance for horizontals to talk to “vertical power” https://unite.openworlds.info/Open-Media-Network/openwebgovernancebody/wiki/01.-Online-Governance OFFLINE
And a video for you https://visionon.tv/w/jqTdss1qrdk4yEZi OFFLINE
We get into the details, of the #OMN you would get Boleyn tag changes on import, so you can auto translate guardian issued tags and add your own tags with both rules and manually.
These tags would flow out of your instances and could flow back to the guardian if you trusted each other.
The idea is to turn news stories/videos into “commons” objects with rich flowing metadata… done in a #KISS way based on trust/moderated link/flows
RSS bring in the legacy objects #activitypub is the main transport protocol.
It’s the news part of the #fediverse, our first implementation of this would be #indmediaback
The idea is to decenter the server, the data is in a soup that flows… #activertypub is two-way this is need to build the horizontal network, so the soup does not ONLY flow one way.
Nobody is in charge, no slaves, no masters. Only trusted or moderated flows. It needs to be two-way, though you are right people being human meany will be one way. BUT we are not building it that way 🙂
RSS brings the legacy in, and it’s a simple display format for embeds and passive news feeds etc.
I think people find the “nobody is in charge” bit a very hard thing to understand, even though we have built meany networks/social groups on this idea, and still do.
In the realm of tech, I call this #blocking the #geekproblem and to get anywhere we need to take the “problem” outa “geek” or we are left with the mess (in a bad way)
The fediverse is an “accidental” openweb reboot
The #fediverse is an “accidental” #openweb reboot by the #fashernistas, so it’s herding cats to get anything done, not a bad thing, not a good thing It’s what it is.
One way to move away from this mess is #OGB grassroots #DIY producer governance.
Otherwise, live (and die) with the mess, and try to stop people bowing down and praying to the #deathcult is a step to keep the #openweb in place.
Talking about the #geekproblem in funding
Q. #nlnet – The problem we face with funding http://hamishcampbell.com/2022/06/06/the-problem-we-face-with-funding/
A. KiCAD, some warrant canary and Armbian aren’t “open internet” projects by any stretch of imagination, but the ones relating to routers and mesh networks are. They’re “open internet” at the infrastructure level – like Guifinet or Freifunk.
Q. yep and are useful for a tiny number of people so worth supporting. BUT the call-out for the funding is for a much wider social affect in the #openweb, so the is an obvious #geekproblem can you see this?
A. Whatever funding they put into the applications layer will be cautious because they probably don’t want to be dealing with Twitter-like problems. Infrastructure is more narrowly technical, and so it’s hard for that to blow up into a scandal, which could happen if they were more directly funding social networks.
Q. yep… but the #openweb needs better USER-FACING code not more backend, the backend is not helping to address the social problems we face where it is being digested by the #dotcons and then adding more mess to compost. How to communicate this problem to the geeks?
A. Really it’s the backend – the plumbing – which needs more funding, because when you peel off the layer of ultra-trendy ActivityPub apps underneath you will find tools and systems which have been neglected for years if not decades. The application layer is currently a house built on sand. Or quicksand if you include Javascript.
Q. We do see the #geekproblem here you are right, and at the same time the view is irrelevant when you step back to look at the problem.
An example, #activertypub would have been still born without the outreach social UX of #mastodon. We have the #fediverse due to the social side of the mastodon project.
Adding more backend is feeding the #dotcons not the #openweb because we need BOTH, and we need to fund both. Yes, we can play “safe” and build tools to feed the future #dotcons, or we can do both and live life with the possibility of social change challenge…
UPDATE
Talking about the problem:
Q. Am thinking the #fedivers is in a bad way, so being angry and annoyed is understandable. The #openweb momentum we had is stumbling, the people sellingout growing as funding shifts… the problems grow, am interested in ideas to mediate these? The fedivers is a CULTURE first and a standard second… ideas?
A. I agree with your observation on the state of the fediverse. And on the cultural aspect too. I envision a Peopleverse (social) that is enabled / supported by the Fediverse (technical). And much more diverse social activity taking place here, that goes well beyond microblogging. And the funding should shift accordingly. You can fund as many innovation projects as you wish, but if the adoption of the technology grinds to a halt, then there’s a high risk this money is wasted.
Talking about the #geekproblem in relation to #peertube
A. Activist video https://visionon.tv/videos/local?sort=-trending&allVideos=true&c=true&s=3 on the #Fediverse
Q. Says I need to log into an account to view the video.
#geekproblem maybe? I don’t know how visionOntv works. Could be somebody’s choice given sets of options,, or could be default, or could be accidental combo of selections., Dec 6, 05:33 PM, bhaugen@social.coop”>
I don’t know how visionOntv works. Could be somebody’s choice given sets of options,, or could be default, or could be accidental combo of selections.
A. it’s a well moderated #peertube we updated our server so now have new filtering functions, but it looks like you have to be logged in to share links based on this, i tested in tor browser and cant see the links, likely they have resion for this or might just be #geekproblem – security first?
Q. Do not attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence…
A. to see malice is to miss the point https://github.com/Chocobozzz/PeerTube/issues/4611 the #geekproblem is simple a critic of a modernist point of view, the persute of control/certainty that diminishes our ability to flourish.
You can call this incompetence if you like, I call it a problem that our “engineering” minded people need to work beyond. The #geekproblem is a good descriptive hashtag.
Can’t share custom filtered video lists URL’s without login being presented. · Issue #4611 · Chocobozzz/PeerTubeGitHub
And the people who created the feature may not have tested all the use cases either…
Or they might have done it on purpose to keep the new feature private…
Technically #peertube is good softwear, but as a social tool it’s not good and few people use it.
Q. Some programmers do not collaborate with real people who want to use their creations while they are creating them.
Did you know they intended to implement the feature you requested, and did you ask to work with them as they did so?
(P.S. if you keep calling them geeks all the time they might not feel like you would be warm and fuzzy to work with…)
A. I was talking to them from before the project was launched… though they have become more distant since they got funding – a different problem, though connected problem
Good codeing, bad social – kinda the #geekproblem
On the subject http://hamishcampbell.com/tag/geekproblem/ of funding, I cover it more widely on the blog.
Basically funding alowes the geeks to be geeks when the funding comes from geeks.
If you think that’s bad, though, it’s even worst when it comes from academics 😉
Lived and worked through 30 years of this tech shit. Composting, we need some composting 🙂
End thought
The #geekprolem all ready has all the “solutions” It’s why it is has “problem” on the end of the hashtag. A problem that is going to kill millions of people and displace billions over the next hundred years #climatechaos we do need to step away and compost this shit #OMN
Note, I generally only use the “stick” after offering carrots quite a few times. Then alternate between carrot and stick with no plan for a good personal outcome.
Doing this for 20 years, in the medium/long term social change is generally visible. Yes you are right it’s a thankless task but somebody needs to do it and I live on a boat and can sail away, I half joke with the last bit.
This approach has only mediate the problems in my expirence though.
Invisible agenda on the #openweb
A. #NGIforum21 #NGI #EU It’s not “usability” its “control” – the #dotcons are built for control the #eurocrates need, the #openweb tools which work fine is for people to people.
The #openweb tools do not have the control that the #Eurocrats need to move onto our tools and be a part of our community. This is going to lead to a “invisible” fight, as they are increasingly funding development we face a crisis in the #fediverse A Sheldon crises talking the language of our crew.
Q. Yes, we should keep things people-to-people and avoid getting involved with large hierarchical organizations who will try to appear friendly but will move the development into a more centralized mode which they can then influence and have control over.
What the EU people want I think is a Silicon Valley in the EU. A digital portfolio from which they can project influence internationally and a vehicle for venture capital and new digital markets. If you read their blurb this is what they say, and I don’t have any reason to disbelieve them.
Obviously something like the fediverse doesn’t really fit with the cunning EU plan (fits like a fish riding a bicycle) and so at some point there will be an ideological parting of lovers (perhaps it has already happened, I am not following the NGI conversations).
A. The #mainstreaming funding of the #fedivers is already completely dominated by the #EU all the big projects are funded by #NGI
This is more #fuckup than conspiracy though am shore conspiracy is growing as people see the levers of power and control which comes with money agenda.
It’s an “invisible” hot war, standing aside is not an option.
Q. Maybe there should be a plan for whenever the EU launches some venture capital fediverse product. I expect it would be like what Trump is doing, but under some EU branded “incubator” and maybe with centralized moderation.
Something like that would create a tug-of-love between the revenue of projects and a centralizing agenda. I’ve been around the bloc enough times to know it’s bound to happen. These things are so formulaic.
A. I think that’s jumping ahead of were we are for the next year or two. Most of the People at #NGI pushing this agenda simple do not see the damage they do. Only a tiny number are actively “evil” currently.
We have a opening http://hamishcampbell.com the last few posts are a way to step away from this “crisis”.
Q. It’s like you can see the truck driving towards the cliff edge.
“If you go in that direction, you’ll fall off the edge”.
The driver says “Nah mate, it’s different this time”.
And you watch the truck as it reaches the precipice, and then falls off.
A. yep but need to look in the back of tuck as it’s filled with much of the #fedivers infrastructure that’s going to go over the cliff.
Actavisam is to sit down in front of the truck and refuse to move, while talking to the “press” about the issues #fluffy
Or pour sugar into the truck fual tank in the night #spiky
Standing and watching while shrugging shoulders is kinda #mainstreaming 🙂
Influx of EU funding into the Fediverse
#Openweb – all together push through, the HARD block crumbles.
Getting a good outcome is hard… feeling this influx of EU funding is going to do damage and little good to the #Fediverse health if it keeps funding as its current agenda.
Though the Fediverse is drifting from its own lifestyle mess…
Let’s try and mediate the funding driven damage.
Then lifestyle driven damage can mediate its self.
Looking for a better social change/challenge outcome and less mess 🙂
unite.openworlds.info/Open-Media-Network/4opens/wiki/Funding-of-openweb-projects looking at the best funding I have found… not attacking them, opening a conversation on a OBVIOUS issue.
We can also look at the funding that is 100% poured down the drain, but we likely have little influence there.
I like to keep it positive, if possible, BUT a lot of people are #BLOCKING which will create some fire and LOTS of smoke, It’s what social change/challenge looks like… murky…
Focus on #KISS to see through the smoke.
Hard to see how you can do a left wing project without showing the workings
open/trust – left
We fall to easily into
fear/control – right
It’s what the page is about.
Yep, the whole #dotcons side of the EU funding agenda is poison and only feeds the mess.
As I highlight, just about all funding is poured strait down the drain, it’s the normal outcome.
#indymediaback one thing to keep in mind, I think we/indymedia crew learned the wrong lesson from these raids/repression.
We pushed fear/control as a solution, which added to the mess #closedweb
As the #Fediverse shows, open/trust was the path we should have taken #openweb
This ripped the #indymedia project apart, leaving us in this #dotcons mess.
When making judgments, let’s be #KISS, to see through the mess.
Shovels and compost #OMN
Yep, trauma is an issue, why I use basic ways of looking at these things. Then it’s up to the people to build up from this simplicity DIY, a grassroots aproch.
Practical approaches https://visionon.tv/w/nw2pRyvj1vfjx1u4ETNEsw a film i made for the legal support crew of a big campaign. The repression was ongoing and strong. The healing was the mass walking through the police stop and search – this likely mediated a lot of growing trauma…
#Openweb – all together push through, the HARD block crumbles.
Practical approaches, a film I made for the legal support crew of a big campaign. The repression was ongoing and strong. The healing was the mass walking through the police stop and search – this likely mediated a lot of growing trauma…
#Openweb – all together push through, the HARD block crumbles.
The is such a thing as society
“The is such a thing as society” we need to build our tools for this anti “common sense” statement.
The advantage of “governance” of the #fediverse (which it needs if it is to become a part of our #openweb based society that is essential for social change/challenge in the era of #climatechaos) is that the is non, this is a good thing.
The Fediverse comes from the “cats” of #libertarianism and to a lesser extent #anarchism without the (O)
In this, we don’t HAVE to think how it fits into current working practices and current economics. Rather, people PUSHING these “common sense” solutions to the fediverse “governance” problems are a part of the problem, not a solution that might work.
To be “native” to the fediverse we need to use code to build “society”. Organizing for SocialHub Community Empowerment has to be anti “common sense” as the fediverse itself is.
Power comes from power, It’s something you TAKE/build and in the best outcome share, it is NEVER given to you.
Private property – Wikipedia was invented in a mythical past when someone with a big club drew a line in the sand and said to the social group step over that, and I kill you.
Notice this is not the foundation of the fediverse, we are base on an open flowing social web and our lines in the sand are “blowing in the wind”. Yes, lots of people do not understand this.
Don’t unthinkingly push current “common sense” #deathcult ist thinking over #openweb projects.
Should we do something that is native to the Fediverse, and what would this look like?
A represents the Greek anarkhia (‘without ruler/authority’), and the circle can be read as the letter O , standing for order or organization.
We currently have a Herding cats governance in the Fediverse and the projects that make it up
An idiom denoting a futile attempt to control or organize a class of entities which are inherently uncontrollable
This was very evident in the outreach to the #EU project.
We have the A but we do not have the O – we are asking what would the O look like in a online social tech project?
The #liberal #foundation model will be forced onto us if the Fediverse is taken up buy large #Burocratic orgs like the #EU and yes the will be a figleaf of “democracy” placed over the self-selecting oligarchy that will be put into place by “power politics” that this path embeds.
This path is the default outcome.
Should we do something that is native to the Fediverse, and what would this look like?
Q. how can someone “take up” the fediverse while it’s based on free software and open protocols like #activitypub, that are available to everyone and cannot be taken up by anyone?
A. Microsoft used to be very good at “taking up” open source projects. Google is VERY good at doing this… I think this is a part of the crises in #FSF foundation currently. When a big institution brings money and resources into an underfunded project it takes power and shapes the agender.
Q. Platform cooperatives, owned and run by users. Coupling this with netcommons. I am trying to launch PoC in ****
A. This is a path. My experience of this path is problematic and have repeatedly seen “process geeks” kill social movements by ossification of process, without any idea of the damage they are actually doing.
The whole tech co-op movement smells like this issue. But I don’t know anufe about this to make a judgment so kinda put the movement to one side for now.
Looking for places where it works on the ground is always a good thing. Examples please.
outreaching ActivityPub to the EU – draft
This was an interesting process playing a role to do the document – outreaching ActivityPub to the EU https://pad.public.cat/p/ngi0-ec-activitypub-liaison-presentation-2021-04-19#/13
Good to get an outcome from this:
- #activertypub as a cross-platform standard for #dotcons who operate in EU
- funding to further this – we would need democratic structures in the #fedivers style to make this real rather than a Eurocratic/power politics dead-end structures.
- Is the path with a good outcome – I have been involved in a number of groups/projects that have received Eurocratic money and the outcome has always been sub optional not to say a compleat disaster. I have seen no/little thinking to mediate this outcome.
So on balance good to do this BUT we do need not to go down unrealistic paths.
Am trying to shift the focus so that the story is more “interesting” and “representative” ActivityPub in the EU sense is a movement as much as a standard – standards by themselves have little/no value. If the story comes from the standard it is easy to ignore, and it will be ignored. A movement, with a bit of jingoism (the ActivityPub speck is maybe largely a European thing?) is an easer story to tell/hear.
Good points, the #fedivers while having a good community, as individuals we do tend to act like cats.
Prepping the presentation is going to be a “herding cats” so best to concentrate on #KISS and focus on the ordnance – what do they need to hear.
The second day we can reveal the all to human delight (and worry this brings)
Like the focus on European as this is true – the #Fediverse mirrors the federated European dream and clearly moves away the US tech imperialism (soft power) of the #dotcons something that is a #EU agender.
My thoughts/feelings are pragmatic on a good outcome.
We have a clash of languages and assumptions for example “surveillance capitalism” and the “social dilemma” both come from inside business and Silicon Valley thinking – so they are not good examples to use for an ActivtityPub presentation which itself is COUNTER Silicon Valley thinking and has its own way of expressing these issues. Just use natural descriptive language instead of quoting the terms.
I don’t have an issue with web01 and web02 yes they are not correct, but they do communicate.
The first question is why – It’s a good fit both strategically, in challenging the big US tech corporations dominance and tactically, in it being simple to implement and open to innovation as it is outside of anyone group control and agendas.
But we are unready as a community if a big institution like the EU takes up ActivityPub you can see this in what happened to RSS when it was taken up by the NYT.
#activertypub like #RSS and the #www came out of grassroots movements, they bring world views with them its WHY THEY WORK. Yes the world view are in part incompatible with #mainstreaming, so the is a strong burocratic desire to hide these world views and then push them out of view/existence.
Why work with big vertical organizations like the EU – The bridges, allow our careerists and wona get statues crew a way to cross over to the mainstream to feed. By doing this they strengthen the bridge by adding mainstream value to the bridges.
Then the refuges from the mainstream shitpile have an easy path to get to alternatives gardens when the stink becomes too much to live with.
The bridge shifts out “problems” and “brings” in resources, expirence and skills to build real alternatives.
We need bridges to the mainstream to build alternatives.
Though the process will likely not go well. When dealing with power politics/vertical orgs in the end the grassroots is ALWAYS shafted – it’s the normal outcome they can’t help this behaver. So we need to keep the bridges in place no matter how bad there behaver is, keep calm and carry on – their behaver is shit to shovel for compost to plant seeds to grow a better world.
Am thinking we need more structears “from chaos comes order” rather than “order over chaos” its trust or control.
In the internal process. It’s interesting that people coming into non #mainstreaming projects and spaces then push “common sense” #mainstreaming ways of working and outcomes can’t see that they are creating a problem.
You then inevitably get Clouds of smoke to cover up the mess. When it clears everyone is covered in soot. it’s not a good look for anyone.
We need ideas on how to mediate this without going down the #mainstreaming paths.
https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/webinar-with-the-european-commission-and-ap-community/1507/179
https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/meeting-notes-for-prep-call-ec-webinar-19-april/1567
https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/outreaching-activitypub-to-the-eu-are-we-ready/1589/11
Bluesky thinking of a “governance” body of the fedivers
“A resource arrangement that works in practice can work in theory”
What exists already?
The is a pretty sorted #ActivityPub crew, then some organizing sites/forums, the yearly conference. MOST importantly some “kings”, “princes” a bit of a tech/influencer aristocracy who currently hold much of the “power”.
Where do we go from here?
On online “governing body” to be a VOICE for the #Fediverse – all done #4opens in social code:
For background on this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition
We have a yearly voting/consensus (online) body made up of “stakeholders”
Who are the bulk stakeholders-representatives:
- One voice one instance – if you run an instance you get a vote – put the URL in as long as it’s online last year your vote counts.
- The is then an equal/matching number of votes based on a “user” lottery – have to opt in by adding your account name. This is refreshed every year.
Then we have other more “affiliate” stakeholders that have to be “ratified” through the body
- Codebases – could be factored by installed based on instance registered above. Over a basic threshold and the body agrees.
- fedivers events – any group that regularly runs events gets a “stakeholder” vote based on them doing it last year. If the body agrees to this.
- fedivers support organizations get a vote if the body agrees to this.
- activitypub standards crew – get votes through all the rest and can have a vote as a founding fedivers org.
Groups and individuals could get more than one vote – which is fine.
This would give us
A representative “stakeholder” body that could accept proposals and make decisions.
How would the body work?
#techshit all ready has way to much LOOK at ME look AT me. I don’t like competitive elections as the shit float to the top
Let’s do a LOTTERY- from these “voters” that makes up the body a lottery decides 3-5 as #spokespeople then leave um to get on with it. There is a tick box to opt out of being in the “spokespeople” lottery, so you have too wont to do the extra work if you don’t want to, its opt out rather than opt in – this is important.
They have the power to speak for the body and thus the #fedivers and can make policy decisions on consensus minus one process. Or put policy directly to the body to be voted (majority vote) on by the stakeholders. (of course they would be subject to recall/impeachment if they fuckup too much, say proposal and 2/3 vote of the body)
Levels of “voice” anyone with an #activertpub account can put in a public proposal to be voted on by the stakeholders – if it jumps that hoop then it can be edited/pushed by an open group of stakeholders though a semiformal #4opens online process to jump to an agreement. Agreements are acted on by the “spokespeople” up to them to take these ideas forward? If non are interested better luck next year with your agender and new spokes people.
Q. what dose digital online Community “democracy” look like
If it does not have elephants running around throwing paper planes it’s likely the wrong structure.
NOTE: of course these alt-ideas have been tried in the offline world, and they generally DO NOT work. But this is no reason to go down the dead end of “liberal” foundation governances that also does not work. People are trying these ideas in Citizens’ assemblies so no issue not to try them online.
Lotteries take the “power” out of power politics… likely worth an experiment.
Compost and shovels are needed.
The power of the voice
- User proposals are excepted by anyone who has an activertypub account- just an idea – this can become a group.
- User groups – a part of the process, these come from ideas getting a level of support of the stakeholders.
- User agreements come out of groups these can then be enacted by the spokes people if they are interested.
- Spokes people can start groups to reach agreements and can enact agreements.
- Consensus of spokes people (-1) makes agreements body wide.
What are the risks:
* need basic security and checks – to see if an instance still exists and is real. If a member account is actively posting or a pulpit – all of this can be done with flagging some of them by code some by people – flags stuff goes to the “security group”
* Groups can be captured by agenders – being open to all stakeholder members mediates this – we solve swamping by having a dynamic short non-voting time based on the number of new members in the group.
* Bad group of spokes people, it’s a lottery, it’s up to the groups to influence and as a last resort “impeach” if one goes a new one is chosen by lottery.
* The actual number of spokes people are dynamic depending on the number of stakeholders but between 3-5 is likely a good number.
UPDATE
- The body is made up of stakeholder one for each instance – you wont a voice you run an instance and register it. This is clearly the voice of the #Fediverse as they are the people running it.
- This is then balanced dynamically by the same number of “users” who are interested in the process, they are chosen by lottery from the registered accounts. Your choice to register or not your account as a possable stakeholder.
On registration the is a box you can untick if you do NOT do this then you are in the lottery to get “governing positions” Sortition – Wikipedia for a background on why this path.
Only people who want to be part of the governing body AND play an active role are enrolled in the lottery.
You second point “common voice” comes from the working groups, agen are made up of ONLY people who are interested in playing a role.
“serving the humans trying to communicate.” we get out of the way and let the humans work it out – we provide structer for the groups, we don’t define the groups.
SocialHub though an interesting tool has strong tech aristocracy which is not surprising as this is how almost all open source project run – the Fediverse is something different which is why we do so badly at governance. Let’s continue to use the SocialHub for #ActivityPub organizing and possibly governance though it has no tools that I have found for the governance.
The money is a subject up for discusern, am just using https://opencollective.com as example.
Help would be needed to do the proposal and #UX
UPDATE
The work flow would be:
Sign up for the site, then don’t untick the box for “do work” if you become a “stakeholder” every time a position opens the lottery picks a stakeholder to fill it if it is you and you would like to do the job – get to it. If you do not wont the job then resign and the lottery will pick a new person.
If you are not picked by the lottery for a job opening the is still a meany things you can do as a stakeholder in the groups. If you are not picked as a stakeholder you can still put ideas for the stakeholders to make into group decisions.
The outcome is something much more representative of the #Fediverse than we can currently think about let alone implement.
The is #nothingnew in this idea or implementation, some examples from Wikipedia
Examples
- Law court juries are formed through sortition in some countries, such as the United States and United Kingdom.
- Citizens’ assemblies have been used to provide input to policy makers. In 2004, a randomly selected group of citizens in British Columbia convened to propose a new electoral system. This Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform was repeated three years later in Ontario’s citizens’ assembly. However, neither assembly’s recommendations reached the required thresholds for implementation in subsequent referendums.
- MASS LBP, a Canadian company inspired by the work of the Citizens’ Assemblies on Electoral Reform, has pioneered the use of Citizens’ Reference Panels for addressing a range of policy issues for public sector clients. The Reference Panels use civic lotteries, a modern form of sortition, to randomly select citizen-representatives from the general public.
- Democracy In Practice, an international organization dedicated to democratic innovation, experimentation and capacity-building, has implemented sortition in schools in Bolivia, replacing student government elections with lotteries.[23]
- Danish Consensus conferences give ordinary citizens a chance to make their voices heard in debates on public policy. The selection of citizens is not perfectly random, but still aims to be representative.
- The South Australian Constitutional Convention was a deliberative opinion poll created to consider changes to the state constitution.
- Private organizations can also use sortition. For example, the Samaritan Ministries health plan sometimes uses a panel of 13 randomly selected members to resolve disputes, which sometimes leads to policy changes.[24]
- The Amish use sortition applied to a slate of nominees when they select their community leaders. In their process, formal members of the community each register a single private nomination, and candidates with a minimum threshold of nominations then stand for the random selection that follows.[25]
- Citizens’ Initiative Review at Healthy Democracy uses a sortition based panel of citizen voters to review and comment on ballot initiative measures in the United States. The selection process utilizes random and stratified sampling techniques to create a representative 24-person panel which deliberates in order to evaluate the measure in question.[26]
- The environmental group Extinction Rebellion has as one of its goals the introduction of a Citizens’ assembly that is given legislative power to make decisions about climate and ecological justice.[1]
- Following the 1978 Meghalaya Legislative Assembly election, due to disagreements amongst the parties of the governing coalition, the Chief Minister’s position was chosen by drawing lots.[27]
“blue sky thinking”
UPDATE
Some stats
population ~ 4.152.753 accounts
active users ~ 1.192.023people
servers > 6.828 instances
Let’s be optimistic and say half the instances signed up that would be over 3000 instances stakeholders and thus 3000 user stakeholders for a total of 6000 and a number from affiliate groups. This number is likely too much, so we can put a limit to 100 chosen by lottery from the stakeholders instances, this is then matched by 100 from the user stakeholders for 200 stakeholders + 5-10 affiliates it’s up to the admin group to choice the right number to build a working community, if you don’t have enough good workers open the pool up if the is to much dicushern close the pool down, try different approaches.
UPDATE
Looking at this in conversation it becomes clear it is a 3 way split of stakolder groups: instances/users/builders&supporters with the last group in big groups could be the size of the others so just to higlight they would be treted in exactly the same way if they are over the number of the body then they would be chosen by lottery just like the others.
External discuern
https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/organizing-for-socialhub-community-empowerment/1529
https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/what-would-a-fediverse-governance-body-look-like/1497/2
UPDATE
Now that is serendipity timeing.
This looks like a tech/process based attempt at grassroots governance. Must say straight out, in my expirence, I have seen many process lead models like this, and they have NEVER worked.
Though it is always a good thing to try iteration. And good to contrast this to the humane/serendipity based aproch that we have been working on at the #omn
I like it.
Outreaching the openweb
With the current #openweb reboot going on there’s a lot of default thinking that is bad, and we do need to learn to judge between the good and bad paths if it’s to live up to its potential. Let’s start to give examples:
* Promoting silos vs promoting networks – as our current thinking is based on closed/silo thinking then when we promote #openweb projects we continue to use this thinking and promote silo/closed thinking rather than harder to understand open/network thinking.
– Protocols rather than platforms, balance talk about #Fediverse/#ActivityPub and #mastodon or branded projects. Our brand thinking is a failure of networking and contains strong unseen #deathcult thinking.
– Always outreach a wide selection of instances rather than a single one, the strength is in the network and not in the silo. Networks scale downwards, more/balanced, with stability is better than one “solution”. Be weary of sites that push themselves as the “place”.
– Networks are based on trust, in this look for groups/families of projects to support. Lose is always good, do not support “we are THE solution” closed siloed thinking. Write articles about a spread of views is better outreach as this is actually the project.
– be weary of projects that promise digital security/privacy first – these projects are always lying and thus dangerous and unhealthy for trust based networks. This is a hard-to-understand open/closed issue, we all need to have real conversations about this.
More to come…