A note on political forums

Community
21

Thank you for your views Robert :slight_smile:

I absolutely tried to achieve the “discuss wooden stock polishing over firearm freedom” effect via the chat channels and offering the platform for anything that could gather a community a little closer to the actual issues. But again, the problem was that since there is no action of any kind whatsoever, I realized I was never to have my “discuss wooden stock polishing” starter, for people don’t do even that (around this topics). What works and thrives is media, strong and sound, doing a flawless job at underpinning much needed and appreciated cultural battle. But my target was the operative side, the “what do we actually do, how do we materialize this”. Many of the articles you saw I wrote them to try to illustrate this because people is so used to the state “managing” every single aspect of life that they do not even conceive anything beyond casting ballots once every 4 years. In my initial ignorance at how political parties work, I thought they were the perfect institutions to allow to organize and instruct people around this matters. First I thought they cared, but when I understood they didn’t, I thought I could change it. I was fundamentally wrong, as I explained in other comments above. So, since people still don’t need it, and parties don’t want it, I realized I had a solution that was looking for a problem to solve. So while I keep personal writings on governance issues, I shifted the operative focus to more fertile terrains like nostr and bitcoin.

3 Likes
22

Did you have more success with those?

It’s not my place to argue what your problem was, but again

To be fair, I don’t know your culture or environment and am using a translation to even read your forum, but on your basic intro I read this:

Consultations, Reports and Suggestions The list of reports and frequently asked questions will grow and improve in detail and usefulness as everyone’s experience in using the forum progresses and the observations are stacked. Bases The Bases on which the infrastructure of this Forum of Political Spaces is built are left here. The Bases consist of the Philosophy and Mechanisms of the Forum. Philosophy consists of the Manifesto and Function of the Forum, the Mechanisms consist of its Architecture and Protocols. Open-Source Policy / Governance This category is reserved to collect references to the concept of open-source policy and open-source governance, as well as the different platforms in existence for its implementation.

You seek to do a

But take a look around

image
image719×448 83 KB

I’d say you nailed it there, this explains it further

So the question is what will you do now?

Was it that or was it 3 years of preparing for a new approach?

I was managing a firearms forum for others over the last five years, it went down two months ago and the owners have yet to restore it, was my five years in vain?

What do I do?

While I’m waiting for them I decided to start a new forum, people are hard to reach,but they are also the most valuable resource on the planet, if you ever listen to Infowars Alex says less than 1% of his viewers purchase anything from his store, despite that he hasn’t quit yet, so you’re not alone in this struggle, and maybe you did the best thing, save yourself the grief, spend time gardening plants instead of people, or maybe you need to reboot.

3 Likes
23

Did you have more success with those?

Zero. Literally zero :see_no_evil:

Matthew 13:13

Thousands of years later, I feel that in my skin :see_no_evil:

Was it that or was it 3 years of preparing for a new approach?

Absolutely Sr, that’s how I’m taking it. Without the pressure of the menace of a falling democracy anymore, I’m now patiently compaginating all of what I learned and processed over the years, and I will turn it into articles via blog posts on Nostr.
I hope my post here serves as a warning on everyone else seeing the old approach. At the end it wasn’t much of an enforcement but rather a cold and hard conclusion that shutting down my forum was the right thing to do. Killing a dedicated three year old “baby” was tough, but I took the decision even without the pressure of money, for at the tail end the guys at communiteq very kindly gave me a couple of months of grace to see if I could revive it. During that time I could also delve more deeply into Nostr, and I realized that that’s what I was looking for all of this time. What I was trying to achieve is going to happen there.

4 Likes
24

Ok, hopefully its not just me but you’re talking over my head again, I looked it up

But don’t get it, this is what?

And useful/compatible with Discourse or not?

1 Like
25

Nostr is essentially just a messaging protocol, with the “message” being any kind of data structure, thus being renderable in various ways, allowing for many interfaces (“clients”) to be developed upon the same information. Since all clients can only work with the same information, you can never lose your work and your followers regardless of the platform you are using. For example, if you are using a “twitter”-like client on nostr and decide to switch to another client (equivalent on traditional media to migrating from twitter to threads, for example), you will not lose anything, nor will need to migrate anything. You just switch clients and all your information, publications and followers are right there like if nothing happened (because nothing happened). The great strength of this non-captive system is that it also do not depends on a single server, but all of the information is hosted and streamed by as many servers (or “relays”) as you like (and trust).

Since it’s just another form of media, it can be considered as useful and compatible with discourse as any other media already is. A perfect example of possible integration with discourse is the one already made for discord, telegram etc.

3 Likes
26

Sounds like you’re sold on it but I’m a bit confused why as you said:

How can you say that?

If its just a messaging protocol and/or another form of media then how does it solve your problem?

If you could not affect change with one software solution how do you plan to with another?

Reading it I was reminded of M-18 here

The Biometrics Automated Toolset is designed with a peer-to-peer architecture that is networked over
secure TCP/IP for maximum flexibility. The Biometrics Automated Toolset client and server can be
installed on a single machine for a stand-alone configuration, or on separate machines that allow biometrics
data to be collected in several field workstations and stored at a central server.

Just being sold from another angle, not that I know, it might be all you’re selling it to be, but the idea of security in this fashion, perhaps just over my head again.

1 Like
27

If its just a messaging protocol and/or another form of media then how does it solve your problem?

That’s a valid question that definitely deserves an answer… … *runs away

I start by answering the question of the second quote: I’m not trying to change the nature of a party anymore, I’m circumventing that altogether. Nostr not only allows to implement all elements and tools I tried to implement with discourse (on everything, blogging, debates, p2p, and even governance), but more importantly it has embedded an economic system via bitcoin, which has and is providing the incentives for ideas and communities to develop there organically. Thus it solves my problem because it haves the right incentive scheme for it to self develop around all of the elements I mentioned.

About the M-18 example: it’s quite the opposite, because nostr works with decentralized servers (aka “relays”). To get more strict about architecture, it’s bitcoin minus the “blockchain” component, since there’s nothing like “double-spending” but all the contrary: you are broadcasting the same “message” multiple times and it’s always authored (i.e there is no “property transference”). Indeed nostr was developed directly from bitcoin software. Their elements thus became reinterpreted for social media: “wallets” became “accounts”, “transactions” became “events”, “clients” remained as such, etc.

2 Likes
28

Honestly if you didn’t have the three years to verify on Discourse I’d dismiss this as a rather good method to sneak in here and promote a competing technology.

Since you do I’m now a bit concerned you went from savior to captive, meaning it appears to me where you began this thread trying to help free the minds of your fellow man that your mind is convinced that this Nostr will free them just due to its being decentralized.

I ask you, very seriously, would you consider Argentina free’d from political tyranny if it became part of a one world government?

Assuming you’d answer no I then ask how does decentralization, which is nothing more than all servers being one server, like one nation being all nations, serve to solve your initial problem of not being able to reach people’s minds?

Can you not see the parallel?

Decentralization is itself a central server, (e pluribus unum) and you are sold on it, you have no more server of your own, in your mind this solves your problem, are you now not ripe for someone to offer the same cure for Argentina?

I pictured that as

and if so its cute, I don’t mean to attack you or Nostr, if it suites you go with it, perhaps you will save the world with it, please keep us updated on your success, but think on what communism is and how well decentralization fits in with it, you no longer own your server, you surrender it to everyone else, and yet someone somewhere somehow will still be in control, it just assuredly won’t be you.

2 Likes
29

Absolutely valid observations, lets go one by one:

First, Nostr competes with Discourse as much as Discord competes with Discourse. They are simply different tools. Discourse was (by providence) an optimal sandbox that allowed me to experiment and find the shape of what later I understood I needed. What Discourse does can be implemented in Nostr (and vice-versa), but the underlying infrastructure makes one method more optimal than the other for distinct use-cases, even if they can share some traits (for instance, Discourse is implementing federation). To be clear: Nostr can not replace Discourse nor vice-versa.

I ask you, very seriously, would you consider Argentina free’d from political tyranny if it became part of a one world government?

Not at all.

decentralization, which is nothing more than all servers being one server

I hope it doesn’t comes out as rude but that’s strictly an oxymoron. Decentralization do not means that at all, it’s the exact opposite. Decentralization do not means that all servers are “one server”, it means that you do not depend on a single server, and crucially, it means that you are not obligated to delegate nothing to any server, for you can be your own server within the same network, if you will, as much as you will. Every server within the network is a clone of the other, not a “fraction of a whole”. Having many clones decreases the possibility of the network falling down for as long as there’s at least one remaining clone online, and the ultimate safety is achieved if you set up your own clone. Even more, you are not obligated to be an exact copy of the others, but “clone” means that at minimum you are able to do and know as much as it’s shared in the public network. Following your example for the case of Argentina, Nostr do not means to become part of a “one world government”, but strictly the opposite, it means the reaffirmation of Argentina as an independent nation (aka independent server).
Decentralization is not communism, it’s the opposite. It means you do own your server, it means you do not surrender anything to nobody else, it means you and only you are in sole control of what you do. I think you might be mistaking “decentralization” by “collectivism”?

3 Likes
30

No worries, lets examine the oxymoron.

Are there other examples of shared public things that don’t have some type of central control?

That means somewhere someone makes decisions right?

If you dispute a decision who is it with?

One of the 45 communist goals (1963) is “Give the World Court jurisdiction over nations and individuals alike.”

If we decentralize then how do you have local rules over anything?

Look those 45 goals up, see how many are left to be accomplished.

Argentina has borrowed money from China to pay its debt, if you push for decentralization you may just get it, if you do and have to go in front of a World Court with China as your creditor how do you think that court will rule?

What natural resources are pledged for that debt anyhow, oil, water, tree’s, people?

In the US we have a lot of bonds used as collateral for debt, I’m afraid many people may end up attached to those bonds as collateral, if not in reality then just in belief, they’ll believe they are and won’t know any different.

If they don’t know different who’s to tell them?

NAZI GE was socialist, which is said to be a bridge between capitalism and communism, when it had to address its debt it began with Aktion T4, look it up, it calculated the cost to sustain life to a slice of bread times a week times a month etc, those costs could be saved by ending life.

Roll along and liquidation was enhanced and it helped the debt even more.

History is repeating

Curious, if you’re Christian and IDK that you are, would you say decentralization is in harmony with Christ, would it not be antichrist to try and remove Jesus as head?

If you can grasp that, then who would push for a decentralized world?

In other words does nature itself not have an order or harmony as centralized?

Sorry if I went to far off the topic or simply miss the mark here, again, please keep this updated as to success reaching and helping people, maybe I’ll start a nostr server or join yours if you’re running your own :slightly_smiling_face:

2 Likes
31

Just as a meta comment, but this topic would be more interesting without in so many level wrong comparing to real world political systems.

And nazy regime was never a socialist system. Plus severe issues of all americas is from very much different reasons and has nothing to do how or why decentralizing happends in this context.

But keep going. i know how to not following this topic when it stops beeing enjoyable.

5 Likes
32

Are there other examples of shared public things that don’t have some type of central control?

You see them everyday! Any file that’s not conditioned to a specific platform and is shared in the web lacks any kind of control. You name it: videos, text, images, memes, etc. You decentralize by using many different platforms that accept the same kind of data. In that same line, decentralized platforms can be so because they are open protocols for sharing, so that you are not tied to a specific sharing service provider.

That means somewhere someone makes decisions right?

Nope, not at all. The virtue of decentralized platforms lies in that it belongs to each community, and so it can take the shape each community likes the most. That’s why they can be “forked”.

If you dispute a decision who is it with?

By inertia, for each platform decisions are taken by the majority and the rest follows as much as they value the community itself. But if a single individual disagrees, he can fork the platform and start his own version of it. Nostr can be forked, and Bitcoin has been forked many times.

If we decentralize then how do you have local rules over anything?

Precisely because you are decentralizing, you can have local rules at will. Of course, as much as you want to interact with other communities, you will have to speak the same language, and there is where standardization appears, and your sharing protocols will have to be equal to the extent you need to interact with others.

Argentina has borrowed money from China to pay its debt, if you push for decentralization you may just get it.

Again, that’s not what decentralization means. That debt makes us dependent. Decentralization is about being independent, thus it implies you should take no debt, not from a single creditor a the very least, and none ideally.

if you’re Christian

I’m not! I’m an Orthodox atheist :slight_smile:

In other words does nature itself not have an order or harmony as centralized?

Strictly not. Only decentralization allows to achieve harmony, and that’s how nature thus works.

please keep this updated as to success reaching and helping people, maybe I’ll start a nostr server or join yours if you’re running our own

I will be posting the updates here and I love the idea that you are willing to start your own nostr server :slight_smile:
I’m not running a server for now, might do it in a future, but remember, you can not “join” a server in nostr. You can either use one (or has many as you want), or make your own. Once you join the public Nostr network (there are many which are private), you join the entire network, and what you can chose is through which client you can render your content (either in “twitter” format, “blog” format, “reddit” format, etc).

2 Likes
33

Thank you for sharing your view :slight_smile:

Please do expand in your argument if you will. It does has to do with everything, for it’s all about governance, be it the web or a country, the laws and the consequences are the same.

The nazi regime was strictly socialism. It’s in the name too, “nazi” is the abbreviation of the german word for “national socialism”. The nazi regime applied one of the many flavors that socialism allows. Remember that “socialism” is permissive communism and nothing else, thus allowing a state to freely define up to which extent you can have “property”. In a socialist regime, your company is “yours” as much as you produce what they allow you to, sell as much and when they allow you to, at the price they allow you to, to who they allow you to. The same joke plays for everything else. Change the word “allow” by “order” and you get communism, thus remember, “socialism” is just permissive communism, regardless of permission schemes.

3 Likes
34

This is becoming increasingly off-topic for this forum. Sharing tips and experiences of using Discourse to run a political forum seems in scope, but debating the merits of different political systems in general seems a bit of a stretch.

6 Likes
35

Meta can mean beyond or as a compound often means a change so the meta discourse in this thread could be showcased, politics refers to governance so your contribution still fits within meta discourse.

Its now ripe for how to govern discussion in an individual boards, which may, or may not have made a difference in the OP early on, when the administration invites feedback from the community on how to govern its bylaws etc, it frames genuineness from the administration vs dictatorship.

Its all about people, how to discourse with and govern them, some are easier than others but all are valuable in one way or another.

Then you did well to redirect away from that area, redirect to another, enlarge the scope and you never know, you might well find gold hidden here.

Or not, you can simply delete the offending content, cut the thread apart or close it too, I personally see moderators as needing social skills more than technical skills, you came in with a soft touch, good job, despite how, as I see it anyhow this topic is/was

from the start, I see its being here as progressive for this forum, so can this forum adapt and grow meta discourse?

:eyes:

3 Likes
36

Just a suggestion, but there are many Discourses - perhaps someone can recommend a Discourse focussed on Politics on which to continue the discussion?

Growing another Discourse is also very positive?

(FYI I checked https://discover.discourse.org but couldn’t find a suitable one :male_detective: )

4 Likes
37

So the OP could try again if they wish, and be listed there with the blessing of Discourse?

Or, perhaps better asked, does Discourse turn away any entries to discover discourse?

Before we’re shut out here, as surely religion is more corrosive to a thread than politics, I’d like to suggest that you’re not alone, that all people are truly without God, going by etymology of your words, which leaves just two questions, can we change that, do we want to?

As well I’d like to suggest you review this sentiment also

As night and day have an order, the tides have an order as well as the seasons, and you can deny the order is a creation design, but

2 Likes
38

This actually leads me to some observations back in track with the original purpose of the post.

First, I appreciate you took the time to look for a forum to contribute to this thread :slight_smile:
But my specific objective when I tried to develop mine was for it to be an operative tool, something that would allow to organize actions and get things done. I did provided a section for debates, but the ultimate purpose for it was to arrive to conclusions and take concrete decisions from there. In this sense, my forum would have been a better fit for an existing organization that could use the tool, rather than trying to evolve an organization from the tool. The thing is that both approaches failed, due to all of the nuances I explained in comments above.

Now, while I did provided a place for debates, since debates around politics are not about convergence but about showing off, even the clumsy structure of twitter is a better fit for the purpose, since in a forum debates tend to have no reach beyond it, even if the forum is public. Debates easily shareable via social media and the ensuing public recognition are a clear winner in this aspect. So one might think: ok, then make a post, and publish it on twitter. Sure thing, but even in that case, and for the same reasons, the ensuing debate will happen in the social platform. This makes more sense for the shared publication to be a blog rather than a forum entry, so going back to blogging when sharing thoughts openly makes more sense. All in all, I couldn’t find a strategy to converge to the forum (for the purpose I intended for it). Discourse is more about focused debates you don’t need to broadcast, because you need to solve a problem. Again, that operative focus of Discourse made it the perfect tool in my mind, but as I explained before, due to being operative it had no place in a political organization (this might sound as an expression of resentment but there are actually strong reasons for a party to behave that way).

3 Likes
39

That seems like an over-generalization, discourse can be a great platform for a good political organization or talk about reformation in governments.

From the beginning of this topic it seemed to be the problem you are talking about is the difficulty in that many people prefer talking about things rather then taking initiative to do work to accomplish something.

Many governments worldwide are becoming more socialist, I don’t see that as necessarily always a bad thing. There certainly have been a lot of problems with the way some governments are attempting to implement new policies.

Hope you can have better success with community organizing in the years ahead.

3 Likes
40

discourse can be a great platform for a good political organization or talk about reformation in governments

I agree it would be, this is not a critique to discourse. Political organizations, as they are structured today in most democratic countries, are strongly conditioned away from being productive on those matters. I’m not saying they can’t be productive, I’m saying they won’t, not out of limitations but out of incentives.

people prefer talking about things rather then taking initiative

That’s rather an inconvenience, not a core problem, for it dampens one of the ways I could attract attention to the tool, but it’s not the core reason it’s not used. It’s just like in any company that uses discourse: you don’t need to “attract attention” to the forum for it to be a productive tool, you need to be productive so you just use the tool.

Many governments worldwide are becoming more socialist, I don’t see that as necessarily always a bad thing.

We can debate about it but not here, I agree with the admin that this is out of scope for meta.

Hope you can have better success with community organizing in the years ahead.

Thank you :slight_smile: . I’m not trying to organize a community anymore, I’m taking the “nostr approach” for that purpose: make the interaction protocol, let the network self-develop around it.

4 Likes