The #openweb reminds us that meaningful autonomy comes from shared infrastructure, collective governance, and mutual trust. Projects like #OMN are built on this understanding: individuals do not create networks alone; networks create the conditions that allow individuals to flourish. Real freedom grows from commons-based collaboration, not from isolated platforms or competitive silos.

The #openweb reminds us that meaningful autonomy comes from shared infrastructure, collective governance, and mutual trust. Projects like #OMN are built on this understanding: individuals do not create networks alone; networks create the conditions that allow individuals to flourish. Real freedom grows from commons-based collaboration, not from isolated platforms or competitive silos.

@warmsignull Did you read the funding work I have done over 30 years... I talk a lot on this subject. (Organic intellectual)

The is no #KISS solution on this path, insisting or pretending otherwise makes more mess to compost... which is your point, you talk about and ignore at the same time.

From my working experiences, the is no simpal or clean path to what you're insisting in pushing in front of the #OMN tool building project.

Please think about what an intellectual, can do to help.

@warmsignull Nop, the site and #OMN project are practical... you can find this by simply looking back - most of the things I talk about have and might still work.

From practice comes theory, it's the organic intellectual path in practice, read back for meany examples https://hamishcampbell.com/?s=biography

yes, we do need to compost this work #KISS

@warmsignull yep, I got that impression early on. So Q. I keep repeating, where are the resources coming from to do the work you prioritise? And more important for the #OMN project - where are the tools to use to do the work... see my last link on funding problems.

We do need focus #KISS

@warmsignull yes, but this is a clean moral judgment. Where at the #OMN we are working on messy material reality. You can't keep sidestepping the Q. where do we find the resources to make that correct moral judgment into something real?

At the #OMN we are about affinity group founding to make the tools to work on this reality #KISS

@ben interesting to hear how this goes for a myriad of reasons.

Formerly in publishing, looking at #omn, etc, etc.

@strypey This is the #OMN project, it's a KISS path we do need to roll out to test and grow

#OMN is often critiqued as if it were a finished system, a moral framework, or an alternative economy. It is none of those things. We need to be clear about scope, sequence, and intent if discussion is going to move forward instead of circling the same ground.

#OMN is often critiqued as if it were a finished system, a moral framework, or an alternative economy. It is none of those things. We need to be clear about scope, sequence, and intent if discussion is going to move forward instead of circling the same ground.

@warmsignull This could cercal for ever and nothing is likely to come from it. So #KISS Q. where do the resources come from to tick the boxes you keep pushing in front of the needed commons building of the #OMN?

Are we engaging with lived historical practice, or abstract risk models?
#OMN emerges from 30+ years of practical projects (Indymedia, squatting cultures, media activism, commons infrastructure). Critique that does not engage with this history risks becoming theoretical at best, academic at worst.

Are we evaluating #OMN as a replacement system, when it is a transitional one?
OMN is not claiming to “outcompete capitalism” today. It is creating the conditions where non-extractive paths can later exist.

Are we mistaking the absence of solutions for a refusal to address the problem?
Survivability pathways are currently absent because the tools do not yet exist. That absence is not a moral position; it is the reason the #OMN project exists.

Are we arguing about the end state, or about the first step?
To many critiques assume #OMN is presenting a finished survivability model. It is not. OMN is an affinity-group and tool-building phase, not the outcome of social change. These stages are being collapsed.

Are we confusing “how things must work to exist” with “how we wish things already worked”?
A recurring tension is between present material reality and desired future conditions. Early-stage projects like #OMN must start inside existing constraints, not pretend they’ve already escaped them.

We need to be explicit that spiky and fluffy are complementary, not opposing paths. They serve different functions in the same path, both are necessary for anything healthy to grow.

The problem is not disagreement between spiky and fluffy. The problem is the large number of people who actively fight against this complementarity - who insist on one mode being legitimate, and work to exclude and delegitimise the other.

This is the majority of people we end up interacting with. So until we name this clearly, we keep misdiagnosing the conflict. It isn’t about tone, strategy, or culture. It’s about a refusal to accept plurality, balance, and context - that refusal blocks progress far more effectively than any external opposition.

* Spiky without fluffy becomes brittle and exclusionary.

* Fluffy without spiky becomes easily captured and ineffective.

Together, they create resilience.
For the #OMN and #openweb to survive, we have to stop treating this as a personality clash and start recognising it as a structural issue that needs active mediation, not denial and #blocking

We need to be explicit that spiky and fluffy are complementary, not opposing paths. They serve different functions in the same path, both are necessary for anything healthy to grow.

The problem is not disagreement between spiky and fluffy. The problem is the large number of people who actively fight against this complementarity - who insist on one mode being legitimate, and work to exclude and delegitimise the other.

This is the majority of people we end up interacting with. So until we name this clearly, we keep misdiagnosing the conflict. It isn’t about tone, strategy, or culture. It’s about a refusal to accept plurality, balance, and context - that refusal blocks progress far more effectively than any external opposition.

* Spiky without fluffy becomes brittle and exclusionary.

* Fluffy without spiky becomes easily captured and ineffective.

Together, they create resilience.
For the #OMN and #openweb to survive, we have to stop treating this as a personality clash and start recognising it as a structural issue that needs active mediation, not denial and #blocking

I’ve opened a new #4opens issue proposing a bounded experiment, not a solution: a funding system where rules are fixed before deployment and no human makes allocation decisions afterward.

The goal is to explore whether some informal power failures can be reduced.

Discussion welcome:
https://unite.openworlds.info/Open-Media-Network/4opens/issues/18

#OMN #Fediverse #Commons #OpenGovernance

A bunch of native #openweb people spent time, energy and focus pushing the #EU toward the #Fediverse:

https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/webinar-with-the-european-commission-and-ap-community/1507

That webinar mattered. It showed that EU institutions were open to #ActivityPub as a way to reduce dependency on centralized corporate platforms.

This is exactly the kind of work we need more of, not less. So what went wrong?

Instead of building on this momentum, the grassroots fell to mess and attention drifted back to the familiar #dotcons. Which, in the end, is just more #techshit to compost later.

SocialHub itself documents this blocking story, but there’s little aggregation or narrative continuity

The missing piece: our own history. This story still hasn’t been properly told:

https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/eu-outreach-if-we-dont-tell-our-story-am-not-sure-who-will/2950

We are very bad at telling our own history. And that failure has consequences.

When people don’t know: that #EU– #Fediverse outreach already happened, that viable alternatives already exist, that these paths were actively neglected,

So that they fall — again and again — for the #dotcons mess, believing it’s the only “realistic” option.

This is exactly why #OMN, #indymediaback, #makinghistory, and #OGB matter.

Before we argue about funding, platforms, or scale, we need: Media to tell the story properly. History to remember what already worked. Governance to keep power visible and contestable

Only then can Europe regain any path to grassroots digital agency without reproducing the same capture dynamics under a different flag.

If we don’t tell our story, someone else will, and it won’t be told in our interests.