Here is the text from the blog post:
#Bluesky thinking of a “governance” body of the fedivers
What exists already?
The is a pretty sorted #activitypub crew, then some organizing sites/forums, the yearly conference. MOST importantly some “kings”, “princes” a bit of a tech/influencer aristocracy who currently hold much of the “power”.
Where do we go from here?
We have a yearly voting/consensus (online) body made up of “stakeholders”
Who are the stakeholders-representatives:
- One voice one instance – if you run an instance you get a vote – put the URL in as long as it’s online last year your vote counts.
- The is then an equal number of votes based on a “user” lottery – have to opt in by adding your account name. This is refreshed every year.
Then we have other more complex stakeholders organizations:
- Codebases – could be factored by installed based on instance registered above. You get a vote over a basic threshold and the body agrees.
- fedivers events – any group that regularly runs events gets a “stakeholder” vote based on them doing it last year. If the body agrees to this.
- fedivers support organizations get a vote if the body agrees to this.
- activitypub standards crew – get votes through all the rest and can have a vote as a founding fedivers org.
Mods – ideas on how to give them a voice?
Groups and individuals could get more than one vote – which is fine.
This would give us
Some kind of representative “stakeholder” body.
How would the body work?
#techshit all ready has way to much LOOK at ME look AT me. I don’t like competitive elections as the shit float to the top
Let’s do a LOTTERY- from these “representatives/voters” a lottery decides 3-5 as #spokespeople then leave um to get on with it. There is a tick box to opt out of being in the “spokespeople” lottery, so you have too wont to do the extra work if you don’t want to.
They have the power to speak for the #fedivers and can add ideas to be voted on by the stakeholders (of course they would be subject to recall/impeachment if they fuck up too much).
Levels of “voice” any “member” can put in a public proposal to be voted on by the stakeholders – if it jumps that hoop then it can be edited/pushed by a open group of stakeholders (DANGERS maybe with some limited invited “experts”) though some semiformal #4opens process to jump to an agreement. Then agreements are acted on by the “spokespeople” up to them to take these ideas forward? If non are interested better luck next year with your agender.
Q. what dose digital online Community “democracy” look like
If it does not have elephants running around throwing paper planes it’s likely the wrong structure.
PS. of course these alt-ideas have been tried in the offline world and they generally DO NOT work. But this is no reason to go down the dead end of “liberal” foundation governances that also does not work
We need fresh ideas or to reboot something from before the #deathcult perverted all our thinking, likely a safer option
Celebrate the mess of humane “politics” to try to banish it is to resort to war in the end – have seen this way to meany times in alt-tech projects. Its both sad and bad liberal shit.
Lotteries take the “power” out of power politics… likely worth an experiment.
Compost and shovels are needed.