- cross-posted to:
- fediverse
- cross-posted to:
- fediverse
With Fediverse going mainstream and corporate interests aplenty, it is very important to promote SocialHub and the FEP process, so that there’s higher chance of keeping the fedi open and accessible to anyone. Anyone can help in this regard.
I don’t think you need to reinvent the wheel here, you can copy the bylaws of a project like KDE or GNOME, there are also projects that point to various governance models like this and this
I agree. There is a lot of information out there from which we can take. But with the particular “grassroots culture and dynamics” I was referring to something that (a quick browsing through) the resources you provided do not address. It has to do with the organic nature, an archarchist and post-(hyper)capitalism streak on the Fediverse (though The Muskening brought change to the culture), and a general weakness I perceive in the FOSS movement as a whole. I am sorry, but I don’t have time to explain now… my notes on some major challenges for Fediverse hold clues for this. They are all social in nature and factors that influence this governance. FOSS Foundations as mentioned may work to an extent, esp. when having paid staff in place to do the chores, but they aren’t good solutions and most ultimately become flawed.
I think lowering the threshold for becoming a member , and therefore gaining power that allows you to influence the organisation by voting on decisions and the people in the board of directors (elected leaders) is the best option, iirc codeberg has a “everybody can be a member as long the they contribute some money”, a more famous example is American Association for the Advancement of Science, unions and cooperatives and cooperative banks (another example is vanguard) also work in a similar way.
You could come up with reasonable arguments against any system of governance i think, like Winston Churchill said: “democracy is the worst form of government – except for all the others that have been tried.”