Funding application for the #OMN

Funding application for the #OMN (Open Media Networking) project, an innovative initiative to revolutionize the landscape of media and communication. The project address the limitations and challenges posed by centralized social networks by developing an interconnected network that empowers people, fosters innovation, and promotes openness and decentralization.

What do you think about/Have you heard about project X? We are always interested in learning about other projects that aim to address similar challenges in the media landscape. Collaboration and cooperation are crucial in achieving the collective goal of creating a better internet and society.

Who are your competitors? While established networks like Facebook, Youtube, and Twitter are perceived as competitors, we view them as irrelevant, techshit to be composted. Cooperation partners are other decentralization efforts such as #ActivityPub etc. are also projects we aim to reach compatibility with.

How will you attract your first users? We plan to attract our first crew through various strategies, including leveraging the advantages of our system, collaborating with “content creators” and “influencers”, fostering change and linking, through leveraging our network of contacts.

Which programming language do you use? Our team has primarily engaged with the XXXX framework. However, we plan to explore existing open-source solutions in social networking to ensure compatibility with various technologies.

Who are potential users? Potential users of #OMN include social activists, frustrated users overwhelmed with managing multiple accounts, power users seeking greater control over their online presence, content creators and journalists, users with specific needs, decentralization enthusiasts, and anyone interested in an alternative to centralized networks.

How does #OMN make the internet more awesome? #OMN empowers people by offering them the freedom to choose their networks and applications freely, fostering fairness, promoting independent media, fostering creativity, and enhancing the peoples experience.

What are you building? We are building a new media experience that allows people to interact with different networks and applications seamlessly, offering greater flexibility and control over their society and local communertys.

Why do you want to bring micropayments to social media? Microgifts are essential for supporting community creators and networks, empowering people to support those they trust and enjoy with minimal effort.

What are the goals of #OMN? The goals of #OMN are to empower people and communertys, foster effectiveness in competition to #mainstreaming “common sense”, promote independent media, and enhance change and challenge in the communication space.

What does success look like? Success for #OMN includes the development of a working prototype, collaboration with various networks and applications, and widespread adoption of the #openweb “native” #OMN protocol and working practices as an internet/social standard.

What are the key deliverables of the prototyping phase? The key deliverables of the prototyping phase include the development of the #OMN #p2p client, User self-hosting, and Networks & Network Server prototypes, along with detailed documentation for developers and communertys.

Who will do the work? Our team, consisting of dedicated people committed to the vision of the #openweb, will primarily handle the work. With funding available, we plan to expand the team to expedite the prototyping phase.

What needs to be done now? We need funding support to commence the development of the prototype and advance the #OMN project to the next stage. This includes development, coordination, collaboration, and public outreach efforts.

How are you licensing any software or documentation you produce? We intend to make all our software openly available, encouraging collaboration and innovation in the open-source community.

How do you communicate publicly about your work? We communicate publicly through various channels, including videos, direct outreach to journalists and content creators, and engagement on media platforms like Mastodon and the #dotcons.

What do you hope to learn during the project? Throughout the project, we hope to learn about community project coordination, software collaboration, public outreach, software technologies, and other relevant fields, ultimately contributing to peoples growth and success.

What happens to #OMN if it does not get funded? If #OMN does not receive funding, we will continue our efforts to raise awareness and support for the project, confident in its value and potential impact on the communication landscape.

Thank you for considering our funding application for the #OMN project. We are excited about the opportunity to bring this “native” #openweb vision to life and look forward to the possibility of collaborating with you.

The #4opens provides a useful lens to evaluate and assess technology projects

The path we need to take in technology is social, rooted in the recognition that technology, at its core, is a tool created and used by humans to address social needs and challenges. While technological advancements have the potential to bring about benefits and progress, they also have the capacity to perpetuate existing inequalities, exacerbate social divides, and undermine democratic paths.

The #4opens framework provides a useful lens through which to evaluate and assess technology projects, particularly in the #openweb and #dotcons. By emphasizing openness, transparency, collaboration, and decentralization, the #4opens offer a set of guiding principles that prioritize social utility and collective benefit over corporate profit and (stupid) individual gain.

Why the social dimension of technology is crucial:

* Empowerment: Technology has the power to empower people and communities by providing access to information, resources, and opportunities. By focusing on the social utility of technology, we ensure that it is designed and deployed in ways that promote inclusivity, participation, and empowerment to balance the current push for control.

* Equity and Justice: In a world characterized by systemic inequalities, technology is either reinforcing existing power structures or serve as a tool for challenging and transforming them. By centring social considerations in tech development, we can work towards growing more equitable and just societies.

* Community Building: Technology has the potential to foster connections, collaboration, and community-building on a global scale. By prioritizing social utility, we can harness technology to strengthen social bonds, facilitate dialogue, and mobilize collective action around #KISS shared goals and values.

* Sustainability: In an era of environmental crisis and resource depletion, it is essential to consider the social and environmental impacts of technology. By prioritizing sustainability and social responsibility in tech design and deployment, we can work towards systems and solutions that are environmentally sound and socially responsible.

The social dimension of technology is a balance, because it determines how technology is designed, deployed, and used to address social needs and challenges. By embracing principles, we can ensure that technology serves the collective good and contributes to building a more sustainable future we need.

#4opens is a step to this path.

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

The new and old #openweb protocols

The #nostr crew are the children of #web3 mess, they are a bit reformed, let’s see.
Then the #BlueSky are the reformed children of the #dotcons
The #fediverse is the child of the #openweb

Q. Where would you put #dat or #ssb and in general the #p2p post-web tools?

#dat is a child of the #geekproblem if it is reformed or not, you can maybe tell me?
#SSB was a wild child, now sickly/lonely with the #fahernable kids gathering round #nostr
#p2p was the poster child of the era of the #openweb it was caught in the quicksand of legal issues, the shadow that was left was eclipsed by “free to use” #dotcons Now finds it hard to come back due to mobile devices not having an IP address, thus most people not actually able to use p2p reliably.

Funding Application: Governance with the Open Governance Body (#OGB)

Introduction: The Open Governance Body (#OGB) represents a beacon of hope in the evolving digital world, where governance lags behind technological advancements and societal changes. In a landscape cluttered with flawed systems and ineffective #mainstreaming politics, the OGB offers an innovative and participatory approach to governance—a blueprint for the future of human-scale decision-making.

Problem Statement: Traditional governance models, whether in the realm of Free/Open Source (#FOSS) software or mainstream politics, suffer from inherent flaws. They either struggle with scalability or are too rigid to adapt to local contexts. The feudalistic hierarchy embedded in FOSS governance structures is ill-suited for the digital age. The need for a more effective, scalable, and adaptive governance model has never been more apparent.

Solution: The #OGB emerges at the intersection of grassroots activism and federated technology. Leveraging the proven framework of ActivityPub—a decentralized protocol powering platforms like Mastodon—the OGB creates a platform for organic activist governance. Through a blend of federated technology and grassroots activism, the OGB introduces a simple yet powerful platform based on sortation, ensuring the distribution of roles and responsibilities and fostering efficient decision-making processes.

Proof of Concept: The success of the OGB is not theoretical; it comes from field-testing with promising results. Collaborations with the European Union demonstrate the versatility of ActivityPub and the #Fediverse, showcasing the potential for real-world impact. The OGB’s ability to empower communities to self-govern, bypassing cumbersome bureaucracy, is a testament to its potential to revolutionize governance at all levels.

Vision: Imagine a bustling local street market governed by its community members—stallholders, shoppers, and local service providers—all having a say in decision-making processes. The OGB facilitates such self-governance through a permissionless rollout, allowing people to set up a governance community with ease. A sortation algorithm orchestrates decision-making, naturally encouraging more stakeholders to participate and fostering a sense of ownership and collaboration.

Scalability and Adaptability: The OGB’s impact extends beyond local markets; it embodies scalability and adaptability. Just as the #fediverse has grown organically over the years, the OGB can proliferate across societal facets, weaving a tapestry of self-governance that transcends traditional fixed boundaries.

Call to Action: The OGB is not only a project; it is a culmination of centuries of activism and social organizing techniques, combined with remarkable #openweb technological advancements. It offers a modern solution rooted in historical success—a rallying cry for those seeking real, lasting change through cooperative, human-centric paths. As we stand at the precipice of a new era, the OGB beckons us to embrace a future where technology enables democracy and human connection. It invites us to join a grassroots revolution, co-creating a governance model that aligns with our times and aspirations. With the OGB, progress doesn’t ask for permission—it extends an open invitation to innovate, participate, and effectuate change. Join the movement, and let’s shape a future where governance works for everyone.

Budget Justification: Funds are needed for technological infrastructure development, community outreach and engagement, research and development, and operational expenses. Detailed budget breakdown available upon request.

Conclusion: Thank you for considering the funding application for the Open Governance Body. Together, we need to usher in a new era of governance that empowers communities, fosters collaboration, and creates a more inclusive and equitable society. We can’t keep making the current mess.

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

Funding Application: Open Media Network (OMN)

Project Overview: The Open Media Network (OMN) is a groundbreaking project that aims to revolutionize digital media by building trust-based human networks using technology. At its core, the #OMN enables users to publish, subscribe, moderate, rollback, and edit content across various sites within the network. This unique approach empowers users to control the content they receive and ensures that it comes from trusted sources, fostering transparency, accountability, and democratization of information.

Project Benefits:

Democratization of Information: The OMN empowers users to control and manage the content they receive, ensuring that it comes from trusted sources and fostering a more informed and engaged citizenry.
Transparency and Accountability: By promoting openness and transparency, the OMN holds content creators and publishers accountable, fostering trust and credibility within the network.
Preservation of Digital Heritage: The archiving functionality of the OMN ensures that valuable digital content is preserved for future generations, safeguarding our collective digital heritage.
Grassroots Engagement: The OMN promotes grassroots engagement and collaboration, enabling individuals and communities to share their stories, amplify their voices, and challenge dominant narratives.
Scalability and Sustainability: The federated nature of the OMN allows for scalability and sustainability, as anyone can participate in the network and contribute to its growth and development.

Budget Breakdown:

Platform Development: $45,000
Tagging Functionality: $7,000
Test Nodes: $10,000
Outreach and Collaboration: $5,000
Maintenance and Support: $8,000
Contingency: $5,000

Total Budget: $80,000

Timeline:

Platform Development: 18 months
Tagging Functionality: 3 months
Outreach and Collaboration: Ongoing
Maintenance and Support: Ongoing

Conclusion: The Open Media Network (OMN) is a vital project for the #openweb, promoting transparency, accountability, and democratization of information in the digital age. By funding this initiative, we can empower users to control and manage the content they receive, preserve valuable digital content for future generations, and foster grassroots engagement and collaboration. Together, let’s build a more open, transparent, and equitable media ecosystem for all. Thank you for considering our funding application.

Funding Application: MakingHistory – Archiving the Open Media Network

Project Overview: MakingHistory is an initiative within the Open Media Network (#OMN) aimed at preserving and archiving digital content shared across the network. It operates on the same principles and workflow as the renowned Indymedia project but utilizes a different template to organize and categorize content. The primary objective of MakingHistory is to ensure that valuable digital content shared within the OMN ecosystem (and wider #openweb) is preserved for posterity, fostering transparency, accountability, and the democratization of information.

Project Objectives:

Develop and implement a tagging function within the OMN platform to facilitate the archiving process.
Establish archiving nodes within the OMN network to serve as repositories for tagged content.
Enable users to choose specific hashtags for archiving, providing a customizable and decentralized approach to content preservation.
Provide users with a “lossy” view of archived content across the network, allowing them to prioritize which content to focus on archiving.
Foster collaboration with institutions such as libraries, archive.org, and universities to ensure the long-term preservation of archived content in structured formats.
Maintain adherence to the principles of the #4opens, ensuring that all archived content remains openly accessible and transparent.

Project Benefits:

Preservation of Digital Heritage: MakingHistory ensures that valuable digital content shared within the wider #openweb and #OMN ecosystem is preserved for future generations, safeguarding our collective digital heritage.
Democratization of Information: By enabling users to archive content based on their interests and priorities, MakingHistory grows a decentralized approach to information preservation and access to knowledge.
Transparency and Accountability: MakingHistory promotes transparency and accountability by archiving content in an open and accessible manner, allowing for greater scrutiny and oversight.
Collaboration and Engagement: MakingHistory encourages collaboration with institutions and individuals interested in preserving digital content, fostering a sense of community and engagement within the OMN network.
Scalability and Sustainability: The federated nature of MakingHistory allows for scalability and sustainability, as anyone can run an archiving node within the OMN network, ensuring wide redundancy and resilience.

Budget Breakdown:

Development of Tagging Function: $10,000
Establishment of Archiving Nodes: $15,000
Outreach and Collaboration: $5,000
Maintenance and Support: $7,000
Contingency: $3,000

Total Budget: $40,000

Timeline:

Development and Implementation of Tagging Function: 3 months
Establishment of Archiving Nodes: 6 months
Outreach and Collaboration: Ongoing
Maintenance and Support: Ongoing

Conclusion: MakingHistory is a critical initiative within the Open Media Network, dedicated to preserving and archiving digital content in a decentralized and transparent manner. With your support, we can ensure that valuable digital content is safeguarded for future generations, growing the needed transparency, accountability, and the democratization of information. Together, let’s make history by preserving our digital heritage for generations to come. Thank you for considering our funding application.

Why fund the reboot of the #Indymedia project

In the midst of global upheaval and a growing disconnect between people and the media that claims to represent them, the #Indymedia project emerged as a beacon of hope. It was a grassroots effort to reclaim storytelling and provide a platform and network for voices marginalized by #traditionalmedia outlets. #Indymedia wasn’t just a website — it was a movement that lived the principles of the #openweb: a tool for people and communities to share their realities, amplify voices, and challenge the narratives shaped by powerful #mainstreaming institutions.

25 years on, the Legacy of indymedia is more than an isolated experiment. It became a global network of activists, journalists, and engaged citizens committed to truth and transparency. It transcended geographical boundaries, connecting people across continents and cultures in a shared struggle for social justice and equality. From covering anti-globalization protests to spotlighting local struggles, #Indymedia served as a vital conduit for stories that would otherwise go untold.

Yet, like many grassroots movements, #Indymedia faced significant challenges. As the digital landscape evolved, maintaining the infrastructure and community support required to sustain the project became increasingly difficult. The rise of #dotcons and centralized social media platforms further marginalized independent media, diverting attention and resources away from alternative voices. These platforms promised connection but delivered algorithmic silos, favouring profit over any public good.

The is a clear need for a reboot, despite its decline, the spirit of Indymedia persists, a testament to the enduring need for grassroots media in an era dominated by corporate control. To reclaim the story and challenge the status quo, we must breathe new life into this project. A reboot of #Indymedia represents an opportunity to rekindle the flame of grassroots activism and rebuild pathways to the #openweb. By leveraging emerging technologies and decentralized networks, we create a resilient, community-driven space where voices are heard, stories are shared, and truths prevail.

Why fund the reboot? This isn’t just about reviving an old platform, it’s about investing in democracy, transparency, and social justice. Here’s why this matters:

Amplifying Marginalized Voices: a platform for communities often ignored by #mainstreaming media, giving people the space to share their stories and experiences without gatekeepers.

Challenging Dominant Narratives: By offering an alternative to corporate media, Indymedia encourages critical thinking and pushes back against the manufactured consensus, growing a more informed and engaged public.

Building Community: by nurtures connections between activists, journalists, and everyday citizens committed to social change, creating a global network of solidarity and support.

Promoting Transparency: Unlike profit-driven platforms, Indymedia is committed to open processes and accountability, ensuring that information flows freely and ethically.

Empowering Individuals: this path inspires people to become active participants in shaping their media landscape, encouraging citizen journalism and grassroots organizing as tools for collective action.

In a world increasingly dominated by centralized control and #dotcons corporate interests, rebooting the project offers a powerful counterpoint, a chance to push the reclaiming of the #openweb for the people. This is an opportunity to create a space where authentic voices rise, truths prevail, and communities thrive.

The need for an independent, people-powered media ecosystem has never been greater. Let’s pick up the shovel, tend to the roots, and grow something new from the compost of the past. Together, we can cultivate a more just, inclusive, and vibrant media landscape, one story at a time.

https://unite.openworlds.info

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

Navigating Grassroots Evolution in Tech Communities: Challenges and Paths

The landscape of technological evolution often traverses a spectrum between grassroots innovation and mainstream integration. Within this spectrum walks #Socialhub, a space that was born as a grassroots alternative—a bastion of the activertypub reboot’s integrity within its “native” framework. This trajectory from its inception in #activertypub is a distinctive approach in the technological path.

The emergence of the #openweb reboot unfolded serendipitously during the #WC3 proceedings. In an atypical scenario where mainstream stakeholders were absent, the reins of definition were firmly grasped by an alternative cohort, paving an advantageous, albeit less conventional, path for the #openweb community’s progression.

Initially, Socialhub thrived as a nurturing ground for a vibrant community, exemplified by the impactful outreach endeavors to the EU within the Fediverse. However, recent years have introduced complexities. The influx of people lacking a ‘native’ #openweb perspective has precipitated a divergence from the community’s original focus, largely due to the significant influence of Twitter immigrants and Fediverse expansion. This shift presents both challenges and opportunities, marking a departure from the initial vision towards a less intricate and diverse community.

Notably, a pronounced shift towards the technical aspects has eclipsed the attention to its social dimensions, critical for a functional alt, with a reduction in the core social-oriented crew and an influx of technically inclined new members. This transition mirrors the WC3 process reboot, necessitating a delicate, respectful balance of responsibilities between the two facets.

The delineation between a community-driven space and a platform steered by a specific technical viewpoint and agenda has become increasingly visible. This deviation from the original ethos poses challenges, signalling a transition from happenstance to intentionality, necessitating a more democratic approach to reconcile these shifts.

Grassroots initiatives inherently embody a level of messiness that distinguishes their authenticity. Constructive feedback and improvement strategies are pivotal in the “native” FEP process, while the underlying ideas in this are commendable, the outcomes remain questionable, requiring refinement in the process. Volatile yet essential debates to fortify the FEP’s legitimacy, particularly in the unspoken political sphere. Proposals for procedural enhancements aimed at bolstering legitimacy within the FEP necessitate a non-technical, social explanation of proposed changes and their wider implications.

The absence of broader social context and buy-in inhibits legitimacy, necessitating a proactive approach by the community to elucidate and democratize these processes. Currently entrenched as ‘black boxes’, both the FEP and the W3C demand transparency and community involvement to garner support and avoid being ignored sidelined by #mainstreaming dev.

Without proactive measures rooted in activism and learning from historical effective activism, this cycle of ignorance towards these processes will persist. Therein lies the importance of integrating wider social buy-in, understanding the social implications of technical changes, and engaging in transparent, #4opens processes—key tenets for the evolution and legitimacy of tech communities like Socialhub in the digital age.

To note for people who are not familer with this way of looking at the world, the ansear to the question is always more alt grassroots vs less mainstreaming, of course this is always a balance so best not to get into a #ragecircle on this mess making.

#Socialhub originated as a grassroots alternative space specifically designed to maintain the integrity of the activertypub reboot within its inherent framework. Initially stemming from #activertypub itself, the forum embarked on this trajectory. The emergence of the current #openweb reboot was more serendipitous than deliberate. Amidst the #WC3 proceedings, the absence of the typical mainstream participants allowed our alternative cohort to drive and solidify the definition through this “native” #4opens technological pathway an uncommon yet advantageous route for our community to follow.

Socialhub fostered a genuine and thriving community. The pinnacle of this community’s strength was witnessed during the outreach efforts to the EU within the Fediverse. However, recent years have brought challenges; the influx of individuals without a “native” #openweb view has led to a divergence from the spaces initial focus, primarily due to the significant impact of Twitter immigrants and the expansion of the Fediverse. This is good and bad, we have moved a long way from where we started, and have to make the best of this more messy community.

Over the last year we have had a (strong dogmatic) shift to the tech side of activertypub working and away from the social side that is needed for making a working #openweb reboot. In the forum we have had a reduction of the core crew, and an influx of the tech focused new members, this is likely a mirror in the expansion and the rebooting of the WC3 process and the two have a balancing act of responsibility.

“To use the forum, you must agree to these terms with Petites Singularités, the company that runs the forum.” This has become more visible and the owner has a point of view and agenda, this is actually not a space for/by “community” in the sense it was originally sold… shifting from “serendipitous to deliberate” the solution to this shift/issue is likely not easy and involves democracy in some form.

Grassroots are always messy, that’s how you can judge if It’s grassroots or NOT 🙂

Let’s try some constructive comments on this to improve the fep process.

What we have here is a classic activism 3 steps forward 3 steps back process, this is a recurring issue.

The ideas behind this are good, the outcome is questionable, and the process still needs work.

There is a current undeclared fight in the FEP → W3C email list, that is likely unresolvable which is a fine example of the fluffy spiky debate, the only good outcome from my prospective and likely socialhub is making the fep more Legitimacy (political) this is a post with ideas for process to help that happen.

To be a valid fep they should have a non-technical (social) explanation on why it’s needed and what are the social implications of this purely technical change.

As we are NOT only talking about technical points here, most are based on social ideas and have social outcomes for social networking. We need this wider buy in to make this process legitimate.

This process is simple and can be started by the original poster, then carried on by the wider community to build buy in and legitimacy.

Currently, both the fep and the W3C are too many black boxes to have any path to build buy in, thus are being ignored defacto.

This will likely continue without some basic activism as outlined above, the is much to learn from this long history of affective activism.

What is Socialhub – in the ActivityPub world

The project started well, #Socialhub originated as a grassroots space specifically designed to maintain the integrity of the #activertypub native reboot. Initially stemming from #activertypub affinity group itself.

What motivated this native path? The emergence of the current #openweb reboot was more serendipitous than deliberate. Amidst the #WC3 proceedings, the absence of the typical mainstream participants allowed our alternative cohort to drive and solidify the definition through “native” technological pathway, an uncommon yet advantageous route for our community to follow.

From this positive start, Socialhub grew a genuine and thriving community. The pinnacle of this community’s strength was during the outreach efforts to the EU from within the Fediverse. However, recent years have brought challenges; the influx of individuals without any “native” #openweb experience has led to a divergence from our initial focus, primarily due to the significant impact of Twitter immigrants and the organic expansion of the Fediverse. This is both good and bad, yes, we have moved a long way from where we started, and have to make the best of this more messy community.

Over the last few years we have had a (strong dogmatic) shift to the tech side of activertypub working and away from the social side. This shifting of balance is undermining the working #openweb reboot. We have had a reduction of the core crew, and an influx of the tech focused new members, this is likely a mirror of the rebooting of the #WC3 process and the two have had a rocky balancing act of responsibility.

“To use the forum, you must agree to these terms with Petites Singularités, the company that runs the forum.” This bad process has become more visible and the owner has a point of view and agenda, we now find that this is actually not a space for/by “community” in the sense it was originally sold… shifting from “serendipitous to deliberate” the solution to this shift/issue is likely not easy and involves democracy in some form.

Grassroots are always messy, that’s how you can judge if It’s grassroots or not 🙂

Mess making is a breakdown in communication – ideas please

Interesting #mainstreaming look, that bypasses the grassroots it’s actually talking about, this is a common issue with academic writing, am at Oxford this winter so have every day “organic” expirence of this.

For governance, we have a widely discussed project on this forum that is “native” to address all the issues outline in the article Open-Media-Network/openwebgovernancebody: ON STANDBY due to waiting for funding – (OGB) This is a space for working through Governance of horizontal projects – using #KISS online tools. – openwebgovernancebody – Open Media Network 4

Then for fighting the capture we have an “organic” path the #4opens if used is a strong defence Home – 4opens – Open Media Network

So to sum up, what we need is for “us” the collective to get up from our knees and become the change we would like to see. This is actually not a hard thing to do “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

——————————————————————-

Continuing the discussion from Can This Platform Survive? Governance Challenges for the Fediverse 2:

Dear @hamishcampbell,

although we already had this discussion several times, you keep posting external links to your website every time you have an opportunity to do so, which is quite a lot, since you are very attentive to responding to any new topic with such links.

What it achieves is that your posts rarely bring anything to the conversation and rather look out of place, and barely get any response. Do you realize that all these links have rel="nofollow" attached to them, which means no search engine will index them in relation to this site?

I’m reacting to this specific message because you, being in Oxford, could have made a much better contribution by summarizing the findings of this paper rather than waving your opinion as a pretext to add two more links to your site.

Should I resort to simply unlinking all such references to it so you have an incentive to bring more useful comments? You have been warned repeatedly that your posting style feels spammy, and I would not like to have to kick you out, because when you want you can make interesting contributions. But most of the time, I feel that it’s a waste of time.

What do others think?

Use the mute feature on this user
Flag posts as spam
Unlink openworlds.info
Leave Hamish alone

——————————————————-

#ragecircle the assumption this is spamming is troubling, and we likely need to look at this assumption? What would be the mod process to start this?

Linking is how ideas are addressed on the openweb

UPDATE: to be clear, this is a mod question here, please can the mods address it, thanks.

————————————————————————

This conversation is getting beyond silly, here is what Is Link Spam: Definition and Types of Link Spamming – Kontely link spamming is.

It SHOULD be obvious the post is not doing any of these things.

I would like the current mods, on this open and community driven forum, to stop this please.

And I ask, repeat (and the risk of this being seen as SPAM) for the 3ed time, can we get some process put in place to mediate mod behaver, thanks.

I think this space is increasingly lacking Legitimacy (political) – Wikipedia it was the subject of the post in question. This is a difference of social/tech path of me and the two mods, not some something to be pushed out of view, thanks.

Please stop this.

https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/can-this-platform-survive-governance-challenges-for-the-fediverse/3727/6?u=hamishcampbell

This mess making from our mods is bringing the lack of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_(political) in this “community site” into view. This is the subject of the original post

I call the subject post #mainstreaming to describe that it’s a reflective post of the chatting classes, not to say this has no value, just it’s not “native” to the grassroots internet some of us want to build.

Then link this to my personal experience, I have 20 years of dealing with this of mess making in #openweb tech/funding so have a lot to say on this PS. this link is not SPAMMING take note, it’s a weblink so you can fallow it to find out more about what I am talking about, if you are interested in clicking on the link.

Next link to the about page of a project that directly addresses the issue the original post is about, with context. I post a link rather than simply copy and past the intro, as this is how the #WWW is supposed to work.

Then I describe how we can fight affectively to push the grassroots “native” internet some of us would like to see, and link to a tool that can be used to affect the needed change. Native to the WWW people can click on the link if interested.

Finally, there is a bit of a spike in the tail, that yes is indirectly pointing at our mods and an inclination on this forum. Take NOTE this is done in a polite way without naming names, so no issue with the CVP etc.

Ok, I understand you don’t like this aproch, this has been made clear the last few years, what exactly is wrong with these posts mods #KISS