Sponsorship

>tell me where I find this location for the OAE account parameters, where I need to do the invitation thing?

Here: https://www.billingportal.com/s/loomio/login/magic?email=susxanon%40icloud.com

Or if that doesn't work, go to https://www.loomio.org/upgrade/7341 and hit "billing portal".

Hope that works, sorry this is a time eater....

Right . . Loomio has billed me and taken payment, according to their invoice mailed to me. I only just saw it. So it's all done as far as Loomio is concerned. I just need to get reimbursed from OpenCollective. I'll mail evidence of the transaction at my bank, to @Oli SB and @Lynn Foster as soon as I can get it. (Unable to get it right now, they have some website problem). Almost there 🙂

OK I'm in the loop. It's along time since I've been in Loomio adminwise - tell me where I find this location for the OAE account parameters, where I need to do the invitation thing?

I took a look and also tried my email, same result. I did see we are now showing as the Community Lifetime plan, with $0 due in 2022. So yes, it looks like @mike_hales is going to have to step in. Sorry Mike!

OK - thanks @Lynn Foster very generous :) I see the funds in OC, which are enough to cover the $199, and I have changed the OAE plan to "2021 Community Lifetime" - however, when I click "Manage payment details" it says "It looks like you haven't accepted an invitation yet! Click the link below to request a Login Link." and offers to send this to Mike's email address. I tried requesting a link to my email but no link showed up... so maybe @mike_hales can try - and if it works, also pay - then I can pay you back from the OC funds?

@Oli SB well hmmm, we got an email today from loomio reminding us they need more money by tomorrow. The original definitely said Oct. 5. I emailed them to point that out, but haven't heard back. But anyway, I just put enough into OpenCollective to get us to $199 plus a bit, if my figuring is correct. @Bob Haugen wanted to help so this is from both of us.

Anyhow, you're on for paying Loomio from our OpenCollective account, with thanks. Hope it works OK, and I'm not too worried if it is late. Let me know if there are any issues or not enough money!

My reasons for wanting to keep this alive, in addition to the reasons other people have stated, all of which I agree, are mostly about inertia, and partly because I think there remain a couple things we can still do with it.

By "inertia", I mean there's several years of history here and 250+ members, some active and still interested. If we move it to somewhere else, I expect it will mostly dissipate.

I do understand that Loomio is not the greatest discussion medium - for example, I just tried to edit or reply to my own comment below and could not figure out how to do it. But none of the others will be perfect either, and Loomio's proposals and threads are pretty good, and we're already here. And the "lifetime subscription" means we will not need to repeat this discussion.

Sure - I can act as banker again ;) once we have funds...

If we do get there and keep the group alive it would be nice to engender a bit more use of the Loomio space... we once discussed a kind of 'testers' section, where people could propose ideas or present concepts, code or even apps etc and others would help review and feedback - I think a place like that with 20+ active participants could be really useful.

That makes sense. I'll wrap up my regular payment.

@mike_hales maybe you should stop paying your regular amount, if loomio stays around and sticks to their word, this will be our one time payment for a permanent account.

How'dja do that? I tried to follow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pound_sign#Windows,_Linux,_Unix and failed

£££££££ ;-)

 I'm paying a regular amount.

Yeah, you are part of that 80.11... (Loomio does not seem to let me post a pound sign u

Sounds good to me @Bob Haugen thanks. "What mike hales did before" was get Oli Sylvester Bradley to be OpenCollective fiscal sponsor, via OpenCoop banking setup. So this arrangement persists @Oli SB ? I won't kick in anything additional, I'm paying a regular amount.

So that people can be comfortable that a contribution won't go to waste, I'll promise to fill whatever gap is left by Oct 2 say.

I also want to acknowledge what @Arnold Schrijver said, and agree that loomio has become hard to use. And to acknowledge the useful ideas several people had about different places to go, including compatible groups. But as @wouter@freeknowledge.eu points out, it is easiest to stay here, and inertia could be helpful if we rejuvenate the group, because a lot of people are here, many casually. We can see what happens in the coming years, as things hopefully move towards more interoperability.

@Lynn Foster and I discussed this situation on our morning walk and we would like to try to make it happen: collective funding of the "lifetime" community subscription at $199. https://www.loomio.org/upgrade/7425?pay=community

I understand from Lynn that we already have 80.11 pounds in an Open Collective account https://opencollective.com/open-app-ecosystem - that's roughly $110.

So we need roughly $90 more. I'm up for kicking in at least $20. If we can get 4 more people to kick in $20, and then find somebody else to do whatever @mike_hales did before to process the transaction from Open Collective to Loomio, we can get this done.

We also discussed a new focus, at least for ourselves: methods of organizing and connecting open app ecosystems, which continue to be very hand-wavy, which might be ok, but it might also be good to try some more-precise approaches.

Dear All,

I would like to suggest a sort of smart migration to another group or a sort of alliance. It's something that it is still in its infancy but with a lot of passion and ongoing projects by its member worldwide. It's the CryptoCommons Association - https://www.crypto-commons.org/ - promoted by Felix Fritsch and Giulio Quarta. I attended its meeting in Austria two weeks ago and I see a clear complementarity between the OAE group and them. Please, get a look at the website and think about it. Nothing of what you are doing will be lost, on the contrary, it could find a practical pathway within a co-design of a social and economic ecosystem inspired by the commoning.
This is my modest opinion for what I can understand of both groups.
Best,

Vincenzo

Il giorno mer 22 set 2021 alle ore 22:29 Bob Haugen (via Loomio) ha scritto:

BH

Bob Haugen shared a Proposizione outcome.

Who cares if this OAE group continues here in Loomio? ( https://www.loomio.org/p/GhN1lYJI?stance_token=ZSboFALw38JAHNm32FC5tR8m&utm_campaign=poll_mailer&utm_medium=email&utm_source=outcome_created )

Risultato

Loomio says: "This proposal has closed. Please consider what as been said and share an outcome, so people know what’ll happen next."

I don't see a clear outcome. But this was more like what some of the Loomio people call a "temperature check" anyway.

So 9 people agreed that maybe this OAE Loomio group should stay alive, but most of them would kick in money if and only if some deliberately vague critical mass wanted it to stay alive. Is that enuf to satisfy those people? I don't know.

But it is some people who want it to stay alive under some conditions.

Some people suggested that the purpose of the OAE as of now is not clear and maybe should be re-imagined.

So if I understand correctly, we got almost 2 weeks to figure out the ongoing purpose and then see if the people who want to kick in to keep it alive are sufficient and if somebody is willing to take over from Mike and organize the renewal.

I started a new thread to discuss https://www.loomio.org/d/In6SlODm/candidates-for-the-ongoing-purpose-of-the-oae-loomio-group

Proposizione

In your response, please indicate if a) you care enough to kick in some money, or b) you would kick in some money if enough other people cared about continuing, or c) you would like to see it continue but can't/won't kick in any money.

Chiuso

Wed 22 Sep

Risultati

Favorevole - 9

Astenuto - 8

Contrario - 0

Blocco - 0

Risposte

Favorevole

M

mike_hales: I believe this remains a significant field, so this open group potentially matters. However, I’ve been financially contributing for a couple of years (still do) so would take others’ contributions as evidence it is in fact worth continuing.

D

dilgreen: b/ I don't see a great deal of activity here - and am only peripherally engaged if there were, but if this initiative sparks something, then I'd like to help that spark.
otoh, if this initiative makes it clear that people want something, then it might be worth discussing what it is that they do want, in the light of perceived lack of activity (from my perspective at least). Maybe starting a new thing with a more current purpose would be worth considering?

BH

Bob Haugen: Been thinking of what to say here. In response to the question on the table, if enough people wanted to continue (where "enough" is deliberately a judgment call), I would kick in. Since these votes have very limited comment lengths, I'll add another comment below.

VG

Vincenzo Giorgino: C)

WO

wouter@freeknowledge.eu: I am happy to contribute to share the costs, a) or b).

Alternatively we could ask to have a dedicated space for free, hosted in a likeminded community where several participants are already, like forum.meet.coop ( http://forum.meet.coop ) or the co-tech forum. But easiest maybe to share the cost of a loomio group and stay here in the same space.

GC

Greg Cassel: (c) I'm spread thin and can't contribute directly. I voted "Agree" but I'm not particularly attached to Loomio being the home of this group; I would just consider it unfortunate if there were no persistent discussion forum for OAE. Loomio does seem a good match given the history of OAE.

TK

Tibor Katelbach: I'm for [b]
in 2 weeks we are launching a
commons campaign interface , for people to make donation promisses , we could test an OAE survival campaign to see how many people would promiss donations for the OAE

LF

Lynn Foster: Agree, (b). I'm not sure it would make sense to try to combine with another group, given different group cultures, and given the number of people who are casually here to keep tabs if anything does occasionally happen.

JW

Jim Whitescarver

Astenuto

AS

Arnold Schrijver: I am not active enough here to put in my voice for either direction.

JF

Josh Fairhead:

FL

Forrist Lytehaause: I’m largely an observer at this point.

MT

Miles Thompson: for me it wouldn't be worth money but i guess im probably not the right person to ask..;-)

EP

Esther Payne: I've not been on here enough to form an opinion

CP

Christophe Parot: If we move to Hive and create a community there, we will earn some money each time an author is posting in the community. http://hive.blog can be accessed with mobile app ecency.
We could also move to the opensource social network http://communecter.org

DH

Daniel Harris: The idea of a poll is good. But not having a, b or c represented as options (that we can do analysis on) means that we can see what people think at all. Nice try though. :-)

TS

Tibet Sprague: New to this space, but it feels like a good group here! I want to figure out how the Open App Ecosystem relates to the Collaborative Tech Alliance which I am involved in

Just to clarify, when we originally started paying, the deal was that if the renewal is not paid, the group does continue to exist, it just loses certain functions (like making new subgroups). Has that changed? Is the very existence of the group and its archives actually under threat?

For the record, I think it's worth keeping the group open, even just as an irregularly-used flowerbed for community tech cross-pollinators. The various discussion threads might sometimes help people to discover and connect with other projects doing compatible stuff.

Due to a series of major life changes, I'm unable to continue with any of the unpaid work I was doing pre-pandemic. So I'm unlikely to be active in focused ethical tech discussions here (or anywhere else) for the foreseeable, although I do still lurk on the fediverse occasionally and check my email from time to time (which is how I saw this discussion was happening).

For what its worth there's an ongoing discussion on SocialHub community to standardize Groups for the Fediverse. Other than that Discourse has renewed plans to federate, and starts working on that in 2022. (For me personally Discourse is my favourite software for community discussion, and in comparison I find Loomio's UX severely lacking to the extent I am reluctant to participate)

The fediverse is slowly adding "group" functionality

For example, Lemmy is Reddit-a-like that uses ActivityPub but AFAIK it only connects with other Lemmy instances for now, with further work required on their AP implementation to connect to the wider fediverse.

A ready-to-use example is gup.pe, which just creates a group user that other users can @mention and follow.

>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.

CTA Hylo group: https://www.hylo.com/groups/collaborative-technology-alliance but I don't know what it takes to join these days.

Comes up on Oct. 5

@Lynn Foster How soon is the renewal due? How long do we have for dithering? I’m not sure how I feel about Oli’s thought. ’Somewhere free’ makes sense, given the lack of traffic this past year? Will the chat survive a transplant? And if not, how much of a loss is that? I’m unsure.

I feel Lynn, @Bob Haugen and @Danyl Strype might be the best judges?

[This UI is making all at.mentions into newlines. What a pain.]

hi Oli, do you have a link to share for the CTA Hylo group? i can't find it

We have collected some funds via OC which should go towards this... if we want to keep the Loomio... but maybe it's time to direct all the conversation / effort somewhere else, which is free. The CTA Hylo group would be an obvious place... since that is free to join and the CTA has some funding which they hope to use to fund various groups which are working on ideas which overlap directly with the OAE's objectives...

Hi, we've received an email telling us our yearly payment is due soon. This thread has the history of our payments etc. - several people have kicked in the last couple years. Loomio has changed their plans to be more money (although I think we could maybe be grandfathered), and also added a new community (no paid staff) plan for a one time fee of $199.

I'm a bit torn on this. On one hand, nobody has been using this group lately, we could just let it go. On the other hand, there's a lot of history and a lot of people here. And the topic remains very relevant, I know a lot of us are still working on this direction. What do you think? I would kick in if people think it is worth keeping. But I'd also be fine to let it go if we think its time has passed.

Here's the basic info:

Here's what the OpenCollective page looks like. We some funding sitting there, although I'm not sure if we have 80 or that is what we need.... if we have 80, that's cool!

OAE has an Open Collective to gather funds to cover the Loomio costs and more...
If you are a member of this group please chip in here: https://opencollective.com/open-app-ecosystem