|
Top-level
 @muzzle I’m more interested right now in simply raising awareness that there is significant research on the subject. But a glaring example: almost all fediverse instances are operated by what’s essentially autocrats: server admins. Only in very few (like social.coop where I am) do the governed have a say in the rule making. 2 comments
@muzzle One of the big challenges with that is that it's unclear how many Commons there are, or should be, that together comprise the Fediverse. For example: is each independent instance a Commons on its own? Is each app a Commons on its own? Should it be? Or is the scope "all people who want to have the same moderation policies"? All people who signed the AntiMeta pact? The standards group defining ActivityPub? And if it's "all of the above", then how do/should all those Commons interact? |
Gregory's Server
@J12t It's a good point, most admins are quite democratic but they are, in the end, benevolent autocrats.
You should consider writing a longer post about how one could apply the principles of commons management to the fediverse if you wanto to spark a discussion.