 Anonymous poll
Poll
Strong yes
31
9%
Qualified yes
119
34.6%
Qualified no
92
26.7%
Strong no
344 people voted. 102
29.7%
Voting ended yesterday at 14:31. 5 comments
 @evan missed the poll but my answer is there should not be an organization to govern the fediverse; there should however be at least one organization to enable many forms of governance in the fediverse @darius I think encouraging various forms of governance on the Fediverse is awesome. I also think we're probably going to see many, many more offline entities like universities, local governments, postal services, and enterprises setting up their own instances. What do you think an Organization to Promote Fediverse Governance Models would do, though? @evan great question. I think: build resources for groups that want to govern (like the IFTAS library does for moderation), build tools for governance (third party and supporting PRs to major software, again kinda like IFTAS here), and advocate as necessary in standards groups for the needs of groups that want to self govern (just like.... okay these parentheticals are getting repetitive) @darius So, I get that, but I think it's more likely that we'd see advocacy for particular governance structures. Say, a Federation of University Social Networks, which focuses on the needs of those kinds of instances, and a different Alliance of Cooperative Social Platforms, and so on. Unsupported crystal ball prediction; take it for what it's worth. |
Gregory's Server
Thanks to everyone who responded here.
I am a qualified no.
I think there are parts of the Fediverse that can benefit from coordination, like how the SocialCG coordinates work on ActivityPub and Activity Streams 2.0, how IFTAS coordinates trust and safety work, and how Fedipact coordinates blocking Threads.