What do you mean?
I must say that I have no sympathy for this organization. In an ideal world it would be interesting, but in a world of global surveillance I do not understand the drive to make alternative communities transparent.
OT: I had communication with them in the past. Dealing with doing a fork, and how their stance on that was (they are fine with it). Reason was the high cut they take, when setting up larger fiscal host. I am of the opinion that one shouldn’t be afraid to be fully open and transparent. It’s leading by example. But it depends, I guess on the nature of the community. Head-on activism maybe less suited.
1 Like
It was a thought I had to enable us to support people in the community who are bearing costs of hosting and data storage for SocialCG activities. Whether or not we use it or if there is a better way is another topic for another thread…
2 Likes
@rhiaro @how @Sebastian I have moved these posts to their own topic, for further discussion.
2 Likes
I thought, we can just talk on SAT.
Also I was a bit astonished, why we needed to move a W3C Social CG SIG (Policy) to another centralised discourse. Are we sponsored by discourse ?
When I want to post this, I couldn’t even say: via @schmittlauch