Sponsorship

>As of now, the fediverse seems fairly easy to me. In some ways, easier than Loomio. Not to you?

I find the fediverse very difficult. Not because of the interface(s), but because of the underlying model. Here (and in the CTA for example) I can talk about the topics that the group is about. In the fediverse (and other social media), if I follow people who talk about these topics, they also talk about many other topics they are interested in that I'm not (or at least don't have time for). I basically can't function there (or in SSB for example). The fediverse is slowly adding "group" functionality (already supported in the vocab/protocol), which may alleviate much of this issue. And I do think federation as an architecture has tons of promise for the platform-y problems we are talking about here (like the OAE and CTA could federate), but it's not there yet except for in the standard social media sense.

>As of now, Holochain is forbiddingly difficult, but should become easier

On that we agree. Basically Holochain is just not ready yet, and it might be awhile because once the core is stable (not yet), it needs more apps. And to figure out how this stuff should really work in a distributed environment (imo this is not clear, they might disagree, and I might be wrong).

All of this discussion is making me realize that I could do a much better job of posting here updates on the things we are involved in. It's not something I think about. And I'd be super interested in occasional updates from other people and groups. Maybe the space needs more gardening of some sort.

Bob. Is there, or can we provide, a reliable pathway to the fediverse and holochain worlds from this one?

For the fediverse, just pin an entry link here? https://social.coop/about but we might want to set up a separate instance.

Can we build up a peer support network to enable effective learning?

Do we have one here? Should be a similar degree of difficulty.

And what prospects are there for the fediverse/holochain world actually to become easy to get into and use for non-technical participants?

As of now, the fediverse seems fairly easy to me. In some ways, easier than Loomio. Not to you?

As of now, Holochain is forbiddingly difficult, but should become easier when they mature a bit more. We'll see.

there seems to be a large overlap between OAE, CTA, and maybe DLC. Can we be anti-divisive and anti-sectarian, as well as anti-fragile?

Lynn and I have belonged to the CTA from its beginning. We never quite fit there, but did participate actively in the first stage, and still do a bit. It wasn't so much sectarian than the founders had different goals, but there was enough overlap for us to participate, and I think still is.

Please remind me what DLC is? Sorry if I should have known...

Sounds really interesting and promising, Bob. Is there, or can we provide, a reliable pathway to the fediverse and holochain worlds from this one? Can we build up a peer support network to enable effective learning? And what prospects are there for the fediverse/holochain world actually to become easy to get into and use for non-technical participants?

Meanwhile, can we/someone provide a channel of information so that what happens over there can be relayed to here? Seems to me that without some approach like that, we are splitting into different sects (again, not new!) and succumbing to the kind of ”divide and rule” that our virtual opponents want.

Also, from what I read from you here, there seems to be a large overlap between OAE, CTA, and maybe DLC. Can we be anti-divisive and anti-sectarian, as well as anti-fragile?

This is an additional comment to my additional comment to my proposal. I can't figure out how to thread this stuff properly in Loomio. Hope y'all can follow.

But this OAE group has had at least two very different agendas from the beginning:
* One was ecosystems of small apps that could work together in larger configurations by communicating with common vocabularies and protocols. I don't think very many people here understood or wanted that. But it continues in the https://fediverse.party/ using ActivityPub as the protocol and ActivityStreams as the vocabulary, and also in projects like https://bonfirenetworks.org/ (look at their https://bonfirenetworks.org/apps/ and https://bonfirenetworks.org/extensions/ , and https://www.newyorktextilelab.com/holochain-app-development .
* The other was collections of separate open-source apps with maybe single signon as the only integrating aspect. The first example of that approach in this Loomio group was https://diglife.com/ but several others have emerged since then. I know @mike_hales has been talking about those lately, and I use a couple of them myself.

As of now, all of my productive conversations about the first agenda happen in the fediverse and holochain ecosystems. None of them happen here anymore, although they once did.

So for me to get personally interested in the continued life of this Loomio group, I'd want to know what is the continuing agenda or focus. What can we collaboratively work on? But I would still be happy to help keep it alive if enough people wanted it, and then figure out what we want to do with it.

I suggest we move to the Opensource community on Hive, which has 56 members
https://hive.blog/created/hive-136515

Two things come up for me. (1) the proposal “Who cares if this OAE group continues here in Loomio?” i done with the standard responses, which don't fit. Not sure how to fix this. (2) If we, as both the OAE and the CTA, engaged in some more dialogue around this, I would hope that we would be able to become clearer about what the distinct niches are for both orgs, and perhaps related ones. I don't see much point in continuing a Loomio group for what could be uncharitably seen as navel-gazing, in terms of continual wondering what we are here for and what we should be doing, never coming to any conclusion. On the other hand, if we collectively achieved some clarity of purpose, it would be essential to have a communication channel such as this. Now a third idea comes up, (3), how about having an OAE subgroup under the umbrella of the CTA?

This is an additional comment to my vote on the proposal. I was part of this group from the beginning. I thought it was useful then. For one thing, the https://valueflo.ws/ was first discussed and the original founders came from this group.
But then it has gone thru several changes of membership and focus. Does it have enough juice for another round? I want to know what it is. What is the focus. Where is it going. Before I believe.

Re the CTA: it started very differently. More "startuppy", if you get my drift. More aimed at financially-sustainable software products (which is defensible), where this one was started by people who were interested in software projects to change the world (which can be foolish). That's a possibly unfair comparison, the original CTA crowd would probably disagree, but we had a bunch of arguments about open source or not in the CTA, whereas I don't remember very many here. But while I like Hylo and have participated in the CTA, at least in my experience, it has not had the same vibe.