Important: We need Your Input on the Future of the SocialHub

[hamishcampbell]

@tallship

I see much in the way of verbiage like “inclusiveness” bantered about, which itself is a nasty term often used to weaponize exclusion, but not withstanding those terrible connotations, suffice it to mention that we talk about including more than just devs in the conversation surrounding governance and “do-ability”, and then disregard that majority when we actually get down to preparing to implement a governing body, or bodies.

Yep, this is a good criticism of “common sense” in current thinking, this recurring #mainstreaming problem killed meany affective activism projects I have been involved in. Simply calling this behaver “off topic” is a polite way of addressing the problem.

@tallship

the only policy set, is the policy set through fiat by the board with input from special interest groups mentioned above and a few select others.

This is the obvious outcome of “foundation” governance, people pushing the hieratical path over the “native” horizontal openweb are clearly “offtopic”, to say this is a polite why of talking to them.

@tallship

There is no money here in our arena, so to speak. Only a concern and a will to advance and protect the Fediverse whilst adhering to its core philosophies - concepts that can and will be subverted and forgotten almost as quickly as those definitions are changed on its Wikipedia page - just like the history of ICANN and Internet governance.

Yep, how to get our more “liberal” openweb fellow travellers to see/act on this as a problem is a challenge, ideas?

@tallship

We talk about a do-ocracy, and do-ability, and campaigns to enlist the most affected and unbeknownst to them, the most affected of the non coding demographic of our DeSoc space, then silently dismiss them when the rubber meets the road and a project or talk of a protocol or Decentralized Social community governance model is formulated.

Yep this is the default behaver in so meany threads, It’s why am stating to call “off topic” as a polite why to MAKE people see that they are likely signal-to-noise issue at best or tolling at worst. It’s endemic, ideas please?

@tallship

Now that the Fediverse has a bit of a darling moment with the media, already this transition is taking place with respect to certain paradigms of Fediverse DeSoc space - one particular platform has been singled out, with s shift away from the branding of Fediverse being a horizontally scaling network to a transition of vertical scaling for that platform’s brand, even going so far as to scrub the word “Fediverse” from its marketing material where it doesn’t directly benefit that brand itself - i.e., stability is better assured when a well funded, professionally operated large Fediverse instance is chosen over that of any #smallweb or community self-funded instance initiative.

A “off-topic” thread talking about this here BRANDING on the fediverse

@tallship

Thanks again and I hope that helps!

Good “non-liberal” common sense points we need to address in this space, thanks.