Stuff-to-look-through.md

@@ -1,2 +1,124 @@
 ![https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/uploads/default/optimized/2X/4/46b1190445cfae228d2377f569244eef3030ba37_2_365x500.png](https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/uploads/default/optimized/2X/4/46b1190445cfae228d2377f569244eef3030ba37_2_365x500.png)
+**
+this likly needs sanaticeing**
 
+text
+Puzzled . . @mako makes a clear pitch on "Free software production needs free tools" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_nK6nP_RCY&feature=youtu.be
+And is very clear on #commons and #P2P (though says most code comes from solo not collaboration!). Yet not a hint of coop ownership of #platforms to keep tools honest & open (GitHub!). Surely tools today become platforms? And platforms require collaboration even if code doesn't? So why doesn't #coop follow automatically, as we talk tools? How does libre not equal coop in  FLOSS world?
+5h
+˗ˏˋ Doug Belshaw ˎˊ˗ 💥☠️✊: @dajbelshaw@fosstodon.org
+
+@mike_hales @mako I think mainly because FLOSS projects have a history of the 'benevolent dictator'?
+5h
+mike_hales 💔*!?¿* @mike_hales@social.coop
+
+@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
+5h
+˗ˏˋ Doug Belshaw ˎˊ˗ 💥☠️✊: @dajbelshaw@fosstodon.org
+
+@mike_hales @witchescauldron @mako 
+
+Indeed, I wasn't advocating for it, merely making an observation (given your question, which may have been rhetorical) 🙃
+5h
+mike_hales 💔*!?¿* @mike_hales@social.coop
+
+@dajbelshaw 
+The question in the toot was/is a real one, yes!
+>So why doesn't #coop 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
+4h
+bhaugen @bhaugen@social.coop
+
+@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
+4h
+mike_hales 💔*!?¿* @mike_hales@social.coop
+
+@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
+4h
+mike_hales 💔*!?¿* @mike_hales@social.coop
+
+@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
+3h
+bhaugen @bhaugen@social.coop
+
+@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
+3h
+mike_hales 💔*!?¿* @mike_hales@social.coop
+
+@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
+3h
+mike_hales 💔*!?¿* @mike_hales@social.coop
+
+@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
+3h
+mike_hales 💔*!?¿* @mike_hales@social.coop
+
+@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
+3h
+mike_hales 💔*!?¿* @mike_hales@social.coop
+
+@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
+Admin
+@witchescauldron@activism.openworlds.info
+
+@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.
+May 02, 2021, 13:38 · · 0 · 1
+2h
+Admin @witchescauldron
+
+@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