Puzzled . . @mako makes a clear pitch on "Free software production needs free tools" youtube.com/watch?v=U_nK6nP_RC
And is very clear on and (though says most code comes from solo not collaboration!). Yet not a hint of coop ownership of to keep tools honest & open (GitHub!). Surely tools today become platforms? And platforms require collaboration even if code doesn't? So why doesn't follow automatically, as we talk tools? How does libre not equal coop in FLOSS world?

@mike_hales @mako I think mainly because FLOSS projects have a history of the 'benevolent dictator'?

@dajbelshaw
¿Arises in a 'libertarian-individual sovereignty' gene in anarcho traditions, inherited by geek-sovereignty traditions of the web? Only half joking 🙄

Geek soverignty? NO thank you! @witchescauldron was surely on to it, saying geek procedural enthusiasm must have stifled any amount of social creativity and wider participation.

If "commons of running code" is the ambition (vs commons of code-repo) geeks don't get to be sovereign. They get to be servants to ordinary humans.
@mako

@mike_hales @witchescauldron @mako

Indeed, I wasn't advocating for it, merely making an observation (given your question, which may have been rhetorical) 🙃

@dajbelshaw
The question in the toot was/is a real one, yes!
>So why doesn't follow automatically, as we talk tools? How does libre not equal coop in FLOSS world?

But the matter of geek sovereignty is another Q. Geek producer-worker coop sovereignty over code is surely not 'the answer'? A commons of code-running-on-devices can't be governed as a worker coop. Even multistakeholder coop ¿isn'?t a big-enough governance formula?

But what? Ongoing question, this one
@witchescauldron @mako

@mike_hales
> Even multistakeholder coop ¿isn'?t a big-enough governance formula?

It's at least a known legal form of organization, if legality and familiarity matter.

If by "commons" you mean Ostrom-style, those had governing bodies that were more like overseers. How is that better? How do the overseers get selected and governed?

@dajbelshaw @witchescauldron @mako

@bhaugen
Seems to me multistakeholder coop is not yet a well-settled form of practice, still very much a field of exploration - and hard to achieve, bleeding edge. The legal forms may be on the books, but that’s not the story of how you do in on the ground. So I think ‘familiarity’ isn’t where multistakeholder practice is at, yet.

As for commons . . How to oversee the overseers? Yep. The megaquestion!
1of2
@dajbelshaw @witchescauldron @mako

@bhaugen 2of2
Important in commons thinking is, it dives under modernist democracy traditions, to older forms of culture. Eldership, evolved wisdom. The nordic ‘Thing’. The commons Court. A weave of rights of contributing, of enjoying and of governing. Stewardship is not at all the same value-weave as electoral democracy or modern ownership, urgently needed today?

This doesn’t hold ‘an answer’ but it poses some necessary different questions? Experimental!

@dajbelshaw @witchescauldron @mako

@mike_hales
Experiments is all we do, so far. As were all of those multi-stakeholder co-ops I mentioned upthread.

I lived in an acequia in New Mexico for a couple of years, but since we were not farmers, did not learn a lot about it. They did have a lot of history behind them, though, which made them work. I got to know one of the elders a bit and heard about some of the history and traditions.

But we chatting here now do not have all those traditions.

@dajbelshaw @witchescauldron @mako

@bhaugen
> we chatting here now do not have all those traditions
Damn right! One of the hard challenges for we in ‘advanced’ societies is how to quickly spin up something like ‘tradition’ and vernacular capability and highly evolved and concrete capacity for valuing, in the ways that old traditions can do.

Respect and detailed attention to these is a start? First-person contact does help. Like with acequias!
1of2
@dajbelshaw @witchescauldron @mako

@bhaugen 2of2
We killed so many of these. Or rather, the ‘advanced’ regimes of colonialism and enclosure and capital did.

Reinventing a capacity for deep tradition is a paradox. But one we damn well better discover how to solve. ‘The commons’ today is a call to engage this? This isn’t, as such, something that’s on the ‘coop’ agenda (which is quite modernist?). Hence the relevance of promoting ‘commons’ perspective too. Not opposed, but different orientations.
@dajbelshaw @witchescauldron @mako

@bhaugen
> Some traditions of assemblies are evolving recently, though, so some form of "assembly of the fediverse" would seem possible.
Yep. Learning to do ‘assemblying’ is one of the places where it’s at. One of the traditions here is the ‘dual power’ tradition upheld by political ‘roots’ movements - big on assemblies. Workers councils, soviets, etc. ‘Civil society’ forms. Somehow, this tradition and coop tradition have come adrift from each other?
@dajbelshaw @witchescauldron @mako

@bhaugen
A problem with this (again, modernist) tradition of dual power and assemblying is that it tends to be about stacked forms of debate, and assumes that practical wisdom is alive and well ‘at the roots’. Which in urban and commodity-based societies, sadly, can be pretty mistaken, bcos wisdom practices have been overcome by individualisms, in the past century or two? A lot of reinventing old insights to be done?
@dajbelshaw @witchescauldron @mako

@mike_hales @bhaugen @dajbelshaw @mako

Worked in "modern tribalism" for all my life. Squats, protest camps, climate camp to indymedia, RTS to XR and even the horror of occupy. I like Rainbow Gatherings as a working example of this culture. they have been going 40 years and the core is still based on the founding traditions. These came from the Vietnam war rather than the mystical hippy shit people talk about.

@mike_hales @bhaugen @dajbelshaw @mako

As a radical grassroot social technologist Am distilling this - working - lifetime into a codebase to "permissionless" roll out frameworks for social groups to form and see/govern themselves.

no name yet

@witchescauldron @mike_hales @bhaugen @mako

From my perspective, the difficulty is that the default non-hierarchical way of organising is consensus. Which sucks.

Follow

@dajbelshaw
I've seen consensus work and consensus fail. So it's more about the organization that tries to use it. And then what they do if it's failing...

@witchescauldron @mike_hales @mako

@bhaugen @witchescauldron @mike_hales @mako

I guess my point is that it doesn't scale in the way hierarchy does - and approaches like Sociocracy and consent aren't well-known.

@dajbelshaw
You'd need to consider what scale for what purpose. Global climate change requires global scale, global digital currencies apparently need only digital consensus and a block chain...

@witchescauldron @mike_hales @mako

@bhaugen.

Right, but that's technological consensus with an explicit goal of *not* trusting human beings. Which is not a future that I'm interested in (beyond payments, perhaps)

@witchescauldron @mike_hales @mako.

@dajbelshaw
Me either. One of the people we did a couple of presentations with last year said "trustlessness is a dead end." And we agree.

@witchescauldron @mike_hales @mako

@dajbelshaw
Somebody also posted something I agreed with recently about functional vs structural hierarchy.
So maybe temporary functional hierarchies? For the duration of the function only? With the consent of the people who have to follow the temporary functional hierarchs?

@witchescauldron @mike_hales @mako

@bhaugen @witchescauldron @mike_hales @mako

Right, and all this makes sense to people like those in this thread who have spent years thinking and practising this stuff.

But to everyone else? Not so much.

@dajbelshaw
Those are some of the people we'd need to get something organized, though. And they will be fussy about everything and have reasons from their past practice. Then we'd need to smooth it out for the next contingent or three...

@witchescauldron @mike_hales @mako

Sign in to participate in the conversation
social.coop

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!