This diagram demonstates the idea of the two parallel tracks of organization, grassroots and formal:
But FEP process is a formal process too. In theory, FEP process and W3C workgroup could complement each other. Two tracks can be imagined as two stages of standardization. Once proposal is finalized and there is a consensus between implementors that it would be beneficial to make it part of the core specification, the W3C workgroup can gather to translate the proposal into a set of changes to the specification document. This way a proposal like FEP-7888 can become a part of ActivityStreams Vocabulary spec, for example.
Unfortunately, this is not going to happen. People who are now trying to restart SWICG have shown zero interest in the FEP process and other things you put in “grassroots” category. I think the Fediverse would be better off without such steering.
9 posts were split to a new topic: OGB Means Open Governance Body
I am definitely thinking this way as well. On the mailing list I proposed that the SWICG should have an “official” version of the FEP process, since the idea can theoretically be applied to any git repo preview + PURL service. However, I also noted that failure to take initiative there will probably lead to the FEP process proceeding as-is (and likely reifying further on w3id.org/fep as a basis for an “extension registry”, pending helge’s FEP or my upcoming rewrite of it.)
I noticed the dynamic as well. Cross-pollination between the two tracks should be stimulated as much as possible. My own focus was mostly on ensuring the ‘grassroots parts’ keep going and hopefully growing, so there might be a proper counterweight and balance once corporations and such start to weigh in for real.
Frankly, I like thinking about timescales. This leads to the following picture:
Minimal time for a FEP to be finished 2 months.
Minimal time for W3C to be finished 2 years.
I think that it’s good someone is laying the ground work to get an ActivityPub update in 5 years …
However, I also think that the changes to the FediVerse will be more on the FEP timescale than on the W3C one.
I agree. I see the biggest risk that a corporate player launches a FEP-equivalent initiative that blows FEP out of the water. Very well set up - scoped as Grassroots Evolution in diagram above - and with paid people maintaining things. Think similar to React or many other such places (e.g. language level can think of Golang or Typescript).
FYI, I am carrying the discussion forward with @gabek on the related Github issue: Open to migrate to Codeberg? · Issue #3 · gabek/fedidocs · GitHub
@angus I see you online… good moment to ask… are the federation plans re:Discourse still going strong. There might stuff we can add into this grassroots organization structure based on that.
A post was split to a new topic: The Coders Song
4 posts were split to a new topic: Misinterpretations of language?
I think the current framework of “DoOcracy.” works for FediVerse development. No new development needed. The rest is out of my purview.
A “DoOcracy” is described as
We are a DoOcracy. This just means “pick up any task you want, and then steer it to completion”.
A progress update was posted earlier this week:
Jeff is also on the fediverse now: Jeff Atwood (@firstname.lastname@example.org) - Infosec Exchange
Yep, power has to be taken, it will never be given, this is very obvues basic history, and we need to stop being loons on this subject and work on projects to address this, a long-established “native” to this space: Open-Media-Network/openwebgovernancebody: (OGB) This is a space for working through Governance of horizontal projects - using #KISS online tools. - openwebgovernancebody - Open Media Network can we add this to the grassroots side. When you do, you can start to see why it is needed, please try and think on this, thanks #OGB
http://hamishcampbell.com/2023/03/25/the-mess-we-have-made-over-the-last-40-years/ a post on why we keep ending up with this pointless mess.
OK I asked yesterday for some clarification on this proposal but as nothing has happened I edited in some questions, can we address them please in a polite and constructive way.
We have an existing project for this path Open-Media-Network/openwebgovernancebody: (OGB)that has very long discusern threads going back years on his forum working and thinking on “native” #openweb approaches to governance we need to think about what has the ability to keep this space as a vibrant #openweb, we need democratic power to protect what we value. For this to work, we need more than #NGO thinking we need a native path.
This #NGO proposal leaves out different points of view, and it’s likely pointless as it achieves nothing, power is not given up without presser, this does nothing to address this. What is the idea to move away from the mess to something more positive?
NOTE we have had this same conversation meany times all ready
OK this “DoOcracy” plan has NOT been working for the last 5 years so with the #twittermigrateion I can’t see this improving, so to do nothing is #BLOCKING this should be obvious.
UPDATE: let’s look at “NOT been working for the last 5 years” means, we can talk about this maybe?
PS. that URL is a brain soup, can you translate it to something #KISS please, we will likely then find an existing idea dressed in #fahernista cloth, this would be #BLOCKING agen.
What is going to unblock this, ideas please? #OGB
Just had a long chat with one of the greybeards trying to restart the WC3 process for ActivityPub, he made a lot of sense.
UPDATE: I tried to take part in the W3C meeting and found out why people think it’s hopless, it’s formal consensuses, this is a path of ossification and #blocking so yes, the grassroots path is needed.
We likely need more feedback from the #WC3 graybeards on how this works, think they have a lot to say, and some grumpy wisdom we need to hear.
On the grassroots side we have this ongoing FediCamp which, defacto, is replacing the more official conferences.
I can have a go at a new mapping if you like in a few days, or feel free to clarify images by adding the different options.
Initial development is roughly three quarters complete. There will be a fair bit of testing to do after development is complete, so at least another month or so.
Nice! As @how mentioned on the Meta forum we are willing to be early-bird testers of the functionality. This community like no other had to cope with so many people saying “Not decentralized, so not participating”.