A Look at Existing Projects

In grassroots movements, almost nothing that works, works with formal consensus, almost everything that works, works with messy consensus. This is an unrecorded but obversely true statement, based on working at the heart of grassroots activism for 40 years.

The #OGB project, is a #KISS way of documenting this by doing. When people PUSH common sense formal consensus over this they are doing damage, not helping, this should be obvuse, sadly it will not be, be patient please.

Foundation funding agenders oftern have a bad affect on openweb projects agenders. lets brefly look at some projects https://decidim.org is #NGO process this like https://www.loomio.org has, as offline process, has been imposed lots of time in activism and has always failed. Formal process is a BAD tool for "herding cats" in social chalange/challange groups. a more ~NGO project under dev https://github.com/policykit/policykit

Looking through https://www.loomio.org for a week and its the same ideas/workflows that were pushed onto climatecamp, indymedia and occupy in the first two case it ossified the projects in the last it was a mess.

These #process geeks have not changed, their projects are a bad fit for life and a terrible fit for the #fediverse or actavisam.

Though they might work for some #NGO and more formal #coop organising.

Formal vs informal - both build and use "consensus" the #OGB is more like https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Do-ocracy

https://activism.openworlds.info/web/statuses/106172789406318487 https://activism.openworlds.info/web/statuses/100295941189430254

An academic project https://thx.zoethical.org/t/on-software-syndicalism/171