@thisismissemEmelia ๐Ÿ‘ธ๐Ÿป @torgoDaniel Appelquist

I can well imagine that. I gather that in order to get further on a healthy evolutionary trajectory for the fediverse, thoughts must be given to further improving the commons-based 'specification development process'.

If everything is free-range text, perceptions and opinions representing often narrow interests, then each get-together will lead to suboptimal outcomes. Each person leaves a discussion with own expectations of what was agreed upon, and what will happen next.

@smallcirclesjust small circles ๐Ÿ•Š Im still enraptured by the metaphysical insights from the Thomist Principle, Quidquid recipitur ad modum recipientis recipitur.

lonergan.org/2009/10/16/applyi

Peoples mental models are wildly different, it takes an awful lot of skill and insight to align perspectives and definitions.

Our curiosity towards governance is appreciating autonomy gains from things such as Fediverse but recognising tradeoffs.

Its infinitely harder than narrow protocol design.

@thisismissemEmelia ๐Ÿ‘ธ๐Ÿป @torgoDaniel Appelquist

0

If you have a fediverse account, you can quote this note from your own instance. Search https://social.coop/users/indieterminacy/statuses/114868239948700703 on your instance and quote it. (Note that quoting is not supported in Mastodon.)