The Rise and Fall of Grassroots #openweb Activism in the UK

Grassroots activism has undergone significant ups and downs over the past four decades, particularly within digital communication and organizing. This post provides an overview of the challenges and successes experienced by grassroots activists during this time period, focusing on the evolution of the #openweb and its eventual decline. It explores the ideological underpinnings of internet projects, the impact of funding and #mainstreaming efforts, and the shifting dynamics between open and closed systems. By examining these trends, we can better understand the complex interplay between technology, ideology, and activism.

To escape our silo thinking

The rise of the open internet, was a surge of enthusiasm for #4opens and decentralized communication paths. Projects like early #indymedia, blogging platforms, wikis, and peer-to-peer networks flourished, driven by an ethos of democratization and empowerment. These offered people and grassroots movements opportunities to connect, collaborate, and mobilize on a global scale. The ideology of the #openweb, rooted in #4opens principles, captured the imaginations of many activists seeking to challenge established power structures.

Why did the #openweb flower and die over the last 30 years

However, alongside the growth of #openweb projects, there were also significant challenges and tensions. The influx of funding from state, foundation, and #NGO sources brought both opportunities and risks. While funding provided vital resources for development and expansion, it also introduced pressures to conform to #mainstreaming norms and intrenched #geekproblem agendas. Additionally, as open internet projects gained popularity, they became susceptible to co-option and manipulation by corporate interests seeking to capitalize on the growing community interest.

We face a digital cliff the open internet may be over

The fall of the openweb, despite early successes, the internet eventually faced a decline, marked by the erosion of its ideological foundations and the resurgence of closed, centralized platforms, the #dotcons. One factor in this decline was the failure of many openweb projects to align with the dominant ideology of the web itself. The pushing of non-native common sense. While some projects embraced trust-based anarchism and decentralized governance, others veered towards more hierarchical and exclusionary paths.

Outline of 20 years ups and downs of grassroots activism in the UK

The rise of a new generation of technologists and entrepreneurs, shaped by #neoliberal ideologies of individualism and competition, led to a merging of open and closed paths. This shift towards closed platforms, controlled by a handful of corporate giants, undermined the diversity and resilience of the “native” openweb. The very chaos that once protected the openweb from vertical integration and monopolization was replaced by a homogenized landscape dominated by a few #dotcons.

Challenges and opportunities, in the face of these challenges, grassroots activists grapple with the complexities of a landscape that is hostile to their values and principles. The siloed nature of many media projects are a barrier to collective action and solidarity, limiting their impact and longevity. However, there are also opportunities for resistance and resilience, through the cultivation of networks based on mutual aid and cooperation like the #OMN

Conclusion, the trajectory of grassroots activism in the UK over the past four decades reflects the broader shifts and tensions within the #mainstreaming path. The rise and fall of the openweb mirrors the struggles of activists to carve out spaces for dissent and resistance in corporatized and surveilled environments. By using the #4opens to examining the ideological underpinnings of internet projects and exploring alternative paths in organizing, activists work towards reclaiming the path of a more open and decentralized future.

#KISS

Women & Online Television in Senegal – Screening of Mistress of a Married Man + Q&A with director Kalista Sy

St John’s Cinema Club and the TORCH African Languages, Literatures and Cultures Network are excited to welcome Senegalese online television series screenwriter, director and producer Kalista Sy.

The event will start with a brief introduction by Dr Estrella Sendra (Department of Culture, Media and Creative Industries at King’s College London), followed by the screening of the first episode of the series Maîtresse d’un homme marié (Mistress of a Married Man) and a discussion with the filmmaker. Khadidiatou Sy, known as Kalista Sy, is a Senegalese screenwriter, director and producer, who became famous in Africa and beyond following the success of her first series, Maîtresse d’un homme marié (Mistress of a Married Man), known as MDHM. MDHM is the first Senegalese women-led television series where women are placed at the very centre of the narrative. The series, first released on 25 January 2019, and broadcasted online via YouTube, became viral, with over 5 million viewers per episode, and being compared to Sex and the City in international media. In 2019, following the international success of MDHM, Kalista Sy made it to the BBC’s list of the 100 most inspiring and influential women from around the world.

———————————–

The trubbles of middle class African life, dressed in postmodern feminism. A Women’s view of plastic black consumerism.

It’s the #deathcult playing out in the current mess, dressed in western ideas of social norms. It’s not that the life and experiences are not real, it is that the culture they push, and it’s assuming are the problem that I am talking about. The videos try and mediate a “better” path within this #mainstreaming “common sense”.

The is no #lifecult in this TV, the reflection of mess makes more mess. The ideology of the era, the filmmaker says I am the radical, the feminist, people look to me.

The filmmakers are funded by product placement, this is thought out the videos, part of the middle class assumptions and binding to the subject. “People buy their identity” the brands push this into the film’s. This is a #NGO path being pushed throughout Africa. This is the “sex in the city” world view translated to local “common sense” in this it is pushing liberal norms.

One question, “very middle class, is this represented as aspiration. She says this look and aspiration is “normal” there, bueity is their strength. Mental health and sexuality to grow the couching and Therapy industries.

A question of the capitalism of the production, the root story is a reaction agenst male repression, seed money from the husband, then support from the women, it is run at a local level, now it is “sponsored” to tell the stores of the people who pay the bills, this is the sustaining push.

It ends in heroic liberalism, and individualism fighting the good fight, by pushing western #mainstreaming

#Oxford

Nurturing the Potential of the Fediverse: A Socio-Political Roadmap

The #fediverse, promises decentralized social networking and democratic governance, stands as a light of hope for a native #openweb. However, as it navigates the terrain of politics, technology, and human behaviour, it faces challenges that threaten to undermine its #4opens civic potential. In this post, we delve into these challenges and explore potential pathways to realize the promise of the #fediverse.

At the heart of the fediverse lies the tension between its potential benefits and the risks of subversion by commercial interests and structural dysfunction. Commercial capture, driven by the allure of proprietary features and enhanced user experiences, poses a threat to the “open and decentralized nature of the fediverse native culture”. The current shift from distributed funding models to centralized and #NGO ones exacerbates this challenge, leading to a concentration of power and influence in the hands of a few people and entities. To counter this trend, developers, producers, institutions, and users can collectively work to uphold the #4opens principles of interoperability and openness.

Structural dysfunction, characterized by a lack of native governance approaches and a reliance on #DIY moderators and self-funded instances, poses another challenge. Without a “native” structure for governance, the fediverse risks succumbing to governance failures and reputational assaults. To address these issues, there is a pressing need to develop democratic governance structures (like the #OGB) that empower people and ensure accountability and transparency at every level of decision-making.

The fediverse is more than just a technical system; it is also a political structure. As such, it requires a nuanced understanding of the socio-political dynamics that shape its development and governance. Techno-Romanticism, which elevates simplistic views of technological progress and overlooks the labour and networks that underpin it, poses a threat to the fediverse’s sustainability. By fostering a culture of critical engagement and social action, we can mitigate this, to ensure that the Fediverse remains a space for civic discourse and collective action.

In summing up, nurturing the potential of the Fediverse requires a multifaceted approach that transcends technical considerations and delves deep into the socio-political paths. By addressing issues of commercial capture, governance dysfunction, and techno-Romanticism, we pave the way for a native inclusive, democratic, and sustainable Fediverse as an #openweb native network.

Branding, addressing this issue

The issue of branding in the #openweb and #fediverse is currently a mess that touches on both technical and social thinking. We need to address this:

Barrier to Community Adoption: Strong branding in #openweb codebases is a barrier for communities to adopt and customize the technology for their collective use. It limits the ability for different communities and groups to collaborate and share resources.
Centralization of Power: Project branding centralizes power in the hands of developers and funders, rather than the communities that are using and running the instances. This leads to decision-making processes that do not represent the diverse needs and perspectives of users.
Stifling Innovation: A focus on project branding stifles innovation and creativity within the #fediverse. Communities that can feel constrained by the predefined branding and unable to express their identities and values through their #openweb spaces.
Inequality in Representation: Branding perpetuates inequalities in representation within the #openweb ecosystem. Communities that lack the resources or technical expertise to customize branding feel marginalized or excluded from #geekproblem and #mainstreaming discussions and initiatives.
Resistance to Change: Strong project branding creates resistance to change within the community. People become accustomed to the existing branding and are thus reluctant to embrace new ideas or alternative approaches that challenge this often ossified status quo.

To address these challenges, it’s important to shift the focus from strong project branding to instance branding to empower communities to make their own #openweb spaces for collaboration and collective action. This involves:

Rethinking the traditional #NGO concept of branding and finding ways to communicate the values and mission of projects without relying on dominating #mainstreaming, project branding.
Creating better user experiences for community members to shape the look and feel of their spaces and actively participate in decision-making processes.
Encouraging open and honest dialogue about the role of branding in the #fediverse and its impact on community participation and representation.
Promoting a culture of responsible branding/templating that prioritizes inclusivity, diversity, and empowerment of people and projects.

By adopting these principles and practices, we can create a decentralized ecosystem within the #openweb and #fediverse, where communities have power over their tools to nurture their community, this is what matters

Please “do not be a prat” about this, thanks.

A pragmatic approach to #openweb security

The Universal Mandate of SSL: A Critique from the #openweb path.

In the digital landscape, the ubiquitous presence of #SSL encryption, while undoubtedly enhancing security, raises questions about its compatibility with the ethos of the open web. The story around SSL overlooks its ideological underpinnings and the broader implications of its forced adoption. This article challenge the hegemony of SSL by highlighting limitations and proposing a more nuanced approach to internet security.

At the heart of the issue lies the distinction between the #openweb and the #closedweb, represented respectively by the ethos of accessibility and decentralization, and the closed-off, centralized web. While SSL undoubtedly offers security benefits, its imposition on all online interactions reflects not only technical considerations but also ideological stances. The insistence on universal SSL usage is symptomatic of what we term the #geekproblem—an inclination among technologically inclined people to prioritize technical solutions without consideration of their broader societal implications or the needs of ordinary people.

The universal mandate of SSL, championed by tech giants like Google, not only introduces complexities and barriers for ordinary people but also contributes to the unthinking centralization of internet infrastructure. Let’s Encrypt, an American #NGO and a dominant SSL certification authority, epitomizes this centralization, posing a significant risk of a single point of failure. If compromised, Let’s Encrypt could undermine the security of countless websites and services, highlighting the dangers of relying on centralized authorities for internet security.

Moreover, the imposition of SSL as a default requirement creates hurdles for community-run platforms and DIY enthusiasts seeking to establish their presence on the #openweb. The technical intricacies involved in obtaining, installing, and maintaining SSL certificates can be daunting for non-experts, leading to barriers to entry and discouraging participation in the vibrant ecosystem of the #openweb.

Critically examining the motivations behind the push for universal SSL adoption reveals a fear-based path rooted in a conservative ideology of control. By framing SSL as a tool to be judiciously used rather than universally mandated, we can challenge the prevailing story surrounding internet security and advocate for a more balanced and pragmatic approach.

In conclusion, the universal mandate of SSL represents not only a technical solution to security, but also an ideological stance that warrants examination. By advocating for a more balanced and user-friendly approach rooted in the principles of the #openweb, we foster a digital path that empowers communities, fosters innovation, and safeguards social freedoms. It’s time to rethink projects like universal SSL and embrace a more inclusive and decentralized vision of #4opens “trust” based securit.

Composting the mess with the #OMN

The growth of technology has revolutionized the way we live, work, and communicate. However, as we dive deeper into the digital age, we are confronted with the alarming consequences of our reliance on these technologies. The links shed light on the issue of “digital” waste and its detrimental impact on the environment.

Gerry McGovern’s article “World Wide Waste” delves into the staggering amount of energy consumed by digital technologies, from data centres to our personal devices. He emphasizes the urgent need to address this issue and advocates for more sustainable practices. https://gerrymcgovern.com/world-wide-waste/

Similarly, the research conducted by Loughborough University’s Volume project highlights the environmental consequences of digital waste in terms of energy consumption and carbon emissions. The article underscores the importance of adopting eco-friendly approaches to digital design and usage. https://volume.lboro.ac.uk/digital-waste-polluting-the-planet/

Furthermore, the conversation around “dark data” and its contribution to environmental degradation further underscores the need for digital decarbonization. The Guardian’s report on the hidden costs of Ireland’s data centre boom shows the environmental toll of data storage and processing facilities, urging for greater accountability and regulation in the industry. https://theconversation.com/dark-data-is-killing-the-planet-we-need-digital-decarbonisation-190423

In response to these concerns, initiatives like Digital Decarb are a #NGO path to promote sustainable practices in the digital sphere, advocating for reduced energy consumption and carbon emissions. https://digitaldecarb.org/

Let’s look at a real alternative path

In contrast to the prevailing trend of digital overconsumption and waste, the #OMN (Open Media Networking) project presents a refreshing approach to digital technology. Unlike platforms driven by personalization and distraction, #OMN prioritizes community engagement and meaningful interaction. Its core mission revolves around building tools for communal use rather than individual gratification.

This ethos stands in contrast to the #mainstreaming of social tech, which at its core prioritizes personalization and profit over community well-being. By focusing on politics as inherently human rather than as a commodity, #OMN empowers people to reclaim control over their (digital) lives and take a path of genuine connections within their communities and wider society.

However, effectively communicating this message to #mainstreaming audiences is a challenge. The prevailing narrative around digital technology overlooks its environmental and social impact, instead emphasizing convenience and innovation. Breaking through this requires not just words, but tangible actions and demonstrations of the #OMN’s principles in practice.

In essence, #OMN, along with initiatives like #4opens and #OGB, serve as tools for social change, enabling communities to shape their digital environments according to “native” #openweb values and needs. Through collaborative efforts and grassroots activism, we can and need to challenge the status quo. Ultimately, the journey towards digital sustainability requires a collective commitment to reimagining the role of technology in our lives and prioritizing the well-being and communities above all else. The #OMN project invites people to join this endeavour, not just through words, but through meaningful action and collaboration. Together, we can harness the power of technology for the good.

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

The problem with #openweb funding and the tools people use

#NGO Internet funding organizations often use #closedweb tools despite their stated commitment to openness and the Digital Commons. Some of these reasons highlight the contradictions:

* Familiarity and Convenience: Funding organizations and their staff are accustomed to using closed tools due to their prevalence in the industry. This is a non “native” aproch that seems natural to them.

* Security Concerns: Closed tools are perceived as more secure, especially when dealing with sensitive information and financial transactions. Funding organizations prioritize security over openness.

* Vendor Lock-In: Closed tools come bundled with proprietary services and platforms, leading to vendor lock-in. Once an organization becomes reliant on a particular closed tool, switching to open alternatives can be challenging and costly.

* Perceived Reliability: Closed tools are associated with established companies or brands who focues on a story of reliability and stability. Funding organizations feel more confident entrusting their operations to these tools, especially if they lack experience with open alternatives.

* Lack of Awareness: Despite their commitment to openness, funding organizations may not be aware of the availability or benefits of open tools. They may simply default to using closed tools out of habit or lack of knowledge about alternative options.

However, advocating for the use of open tools, such as #FOSS video streaming solutions and open collaboration platforms, aligns with the principles of openness and transparency promoted by funding organizations like #NGI. By encouraging the adoption of open tools at events and in everyday operations, organizations can demonstrate their commitment to fostering a more inclusive, accessible, and equitable #openweb.

We need to advocate for a more open-web native approach within the EU and beyond, ensuring that the internet remains a digital common that empowers people and promotes trust, collaboration, and innovation.

https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/we-ask-that-ngi-use-native-approaches-and-tools-at-future-openweb-events/3728

Please share this thanks

We need fresh thinking on this mess

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

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

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

We need fresh thinking on this mess.

On the #openweb us and them is simple, we have to define things then collectively fight as hard as we can to keep that definition #4opens #KISS

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

As the righwing is failing, the mess is growing in the left…

What #mastodon is doing now is going to lead to a lot of mess, duo to people squabbling. This might or might not be a level of mess that negates the vertical move to “simplicity” of a single codebase and a single instance. That would be a waste… and it was the king and his https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Favourite that are pushing this mess, good not to get confused about this part.

This is actually the same as the #NGO mess we see in #XR at the same time

As the righwing is failing, the mess is growing in the left…

A short film about the bigone #XR event

Extinction Rebellion, the-big-one – “is this all the is”

Title: The Spiky Fluffy Debate: Reflections on the Extinction Rebellion Event

Opening shot of London streets bustling with cars and people.

Narrator: In 2019, the Extinction Rebellion movement took the world by storm with its call for urgent action on climate change. Thousands of people took to the streets, demanding that governments take concrete steps to mitigate the effects of the climate crisis. But did the movement live up to its promise?

Cut to an interview with a protester.

Protester: I went to the #XR event thinking that they might have learned from the history of activism about how not to be pointless.

Narrator: Our protagonist went to the event with high hopes, hoping for a clever and spiky fluffy debate that would challenge the status quo. But what did they find?

Cut to footage of the Extinction Rebellion event.

Narrator: Our protagonist found a diversity of #fluffy “education” spaces being pushed over by cars and tourists. The dominant outreach was all dogmatic and fluffy, with NGOs asking the government to act. There was no consensus for direct action, and the police moved the protesters back into narrow “permitted” penned-in spaces.

Protester: The only feeling of empowerment was when people overflowed onto the roads and blocked the traffic for a time. But there was no consciousness for this.

Narrator: The second day was the same, with a very slow A to B march and middle-class protesters in animal costumes. The demands went into the government, and a few days later, they were ignored.

Protester: Hundreds of millions of people are going to die, and billions will be displaced over the next few decades, and this was it?

Narrator: Our protagonist met with the original core UK Indymedia crew, who gave him some background on how the event was organized. The outcome of the NGO meetings was a diversity of strategies, starting with four days of fluffy asking for action, followed by a week of #spicy traditional non-violent direct action led by the “just stop oil” group. But this plan was nowhere to be seen during the event.

Cut to footage of the tiny “just stop oil” tent at the event.

Narrator: Our protagonist searched everywhere for announcements and people making this good plan happen but found nothing. The diversity of tactics was becoming an obvious fig leaf for the NGO crew to push their pointless agenda.

Protester: If any spicy actions came after the government ignored the fluffy demo, then it was not going to get supported.

Narrator: In the end, the event was a disappointment, with no concrete action or plans for the future.

Closing shot of the London streets.

Narrator: The Extinction Rebellion movement may have brought attention to the climate crisis, but without concrete action and a plan for the future, will it make any difference? The spiky fluffy debate may have sparked hope, but it remains to be seen if it will lead to real change.

My text:

I went to the #XR event thinking that they might have learned from the history of activism how not to be pointless. Our online media is very broken so from the information I received I got the impression the might be a clever spiky fluffy debate at the “bigone demo” I was hearing different views with no “facts” in the weeks up to the event I was wondering if I should bring a tents as the was a vibe (hope) that it might be something more than a A to B march. People had said that the were going to take the space around parliament and then refuse to move in till the government excepted the need to do something real about climatechaos. I tried reaching out and searching online to see if something affective like this was planned, but could not find any “facts” or real information.

The dominant outreach was all dogmatic fluffy #NGO path of asking the “government” to act, which was so obviously not going to work that I kept my belief that people could not be this stupid and self-defeating agen. So I keep looking for information that something useful is being planned, I did not find any. So gave up the idea of joining an occupation and instead of a tent and supply’s I packed a small bag full of camera gear and headed to London.

On all the media I use and subscribe to I could not find any info on the event, turning up on the first day people started to arrive, it was a diversity of #fluffy “education” spaces being pushed over by cars and the tourists, the only feeling of empowerment was when people overflowed onto the roads and blocked the traffic for a time, this provided a blessed moment of peace and brought focus free from the car noise, but the was no conciseness for this and the stewards and police moved the people back into narrow “permitted” penned in spaces and the noise and repression of car culture was back to take away our small sense of empowerment.

This was the first day.

The second day more people came, the same #fluffy “education” spaces and a very slow A to B march. It was nice to see the middle classes in their animal costumes, people had gathered, a good thing. But that was it, we were given a bit more space by the police. Our “demands” went into the government, and a few days latter they were ignored.

The were a few more days, I did not go, but from the little I found on my media it was the same.

Earlier at the event I met 3 or the original core UK indymedia crew, they gave me some background on the process of how we ended up repeating such an obviously pointless event in such a time of need for action. It turns out the had been months of #NGO meetings to move the event away from confrontation to being one of “asking for action”, the outcome from the #NGO side was a diversity of stratageys – there would be 4 days of fluffy – the ask – then if (well obviously when) this was ignored there would be a week of #spicy (a new term for #spiky) traditional non-violent direct action #XR protests led by the “just stop oil group”. This was not a bad plan, I was kinda of impressed, a good working example of the spiky fluffy debate, I thought in a moment of hope.

So during the event, I looked everywhere for announcements and people making this good plan happen. I found nothing, what I did find was a tiny “just stop oil” tent, with some teenagers shadowed between the big pushy NGO tents. Agen I was disappointed this “diversity of tactics” was becoming an obvious a fig leaf for the #NGO crew to push there pointless agenda, if any spicy actions came after the government ignored the fluffy demo then it was not going to get supported.

Agen I looked on my media and could not find anything about these actions on Monday or Tuesdays in till my partner who is on Instagram said they were posting a video of a handful of people slow marching round London, this was it. I looked on my media agen but could not find anything about this, looked on XR website, nothing, looked on “just stop oil”, only a email list, telegram channel no information.

At this point I shrugged and though about making this video…

Hundreds of millions of people are going to die and billions will be displaced over the next few decades and this was it… this was it… really this was it?

The risk of co-optation or watering down of the original #openweb values and principles

Talking to the person behind https://spreadmastodon.org/

Had a look through his https://bluem.ventures/ list of projects, it’s all Slacktivism – Wikipedia 2 and #NGO pushing.

Asked him, “Have you taken a moment or two to think this might be seen, on balance, as damage rather than helping the #openweb culture of the communers who built the spaces you are going to be pushing at? It’s important not to be doing blinded Imperialism – Wikipedia coming into a “commons” space.”

Issues on this here Activism can we try and address these issues, to mediate the balance of damage/good before you push the project out, thanks.

#openweb culture comes from the principles and values of the early internet, where open standards and decentralized systems were prioritized over closed, proprietary ones. This culture is based on the idea of a free and open internet, where anyone can participate and create without the need for gatekeepers.

#Slacktivism is a term used to describe online activism that requires minimal effort or engagement, such as signing an online petition or changing your social media profile picture. While these actions can raise awareness about an issue, they are criticized for being insincere and ineffective in creating real change.

#NGOs, or non-governmental organizations, are involved in social activism and advocacy work. However, they are criticized for promoting their own agendas rather than empowering the communities they claim to serve. This can create a power imbalance, where the voices and needs of the community are not heard or prioritized.

We need to think about the #mainstreaming of these issues’ due to the increasing visibility and attention they are pushing in the wider public, move back to the #openweb.

With this shift in attention comes the risk of co-optation or watering down of the original values and principles. It is important to be on guard and maintain a healthy balance, ensuring that the voices and needs of communities are prioritized and that efforts are not insincere or ineffective.

The new #spreadmastodon project needs to balance the damage with the good it does with its outreach project.

The wider #Fediverse relying heavily on a single platform, mastodon or instance https://mastodon.social, can have negative consequences. Leading to a concentration of power and influence in the hands of a few individuals and entities. This can result in issues such as censorship, lack of innovation, and a loss of privacy for users.

Additionally, if a single server or platform is responsible for hosting a significant portion of user data or activity, it could become a target for cyberattacks or data breaches.

Why is Mastodon so dominant in the fediverse?

Q. Why is Mastodon so dominant in the fediverse?

A. It had better #UX and @Gargron running it was an effective communicator at #KISS and built it out as a #4opens project alongside a healthy (white) lie about security and privacy.
The rest of the projects lacked these things – #Pleroma the obverse compaine was ripped apart by the #geekproblem then embraced by the right-wing. #Peertube was stuck in a good but closed development for years. #Pixelfed is a little brother project to #mastodon. Then there are a whole flood of #NGO funded projects that have no community.

Might be useful to see it as we’re having a “KING” problem, then the rest are #feudalism all the way down. This should be easy to fix as its #4opens and all #openweb, but it’s not. Just about everyone is hard #BLOCKING the obvuse need for “democracy” as a path out of the mess #OGB

How is the #NOSTR world doing on this?