Re: Discord

On Sat, 22 May 2021 at 00:47, Jonas Smedegaard <jonas@jones.dk> wrote:

> Quoting Timothy Holborn (2021-05-21 16:18:13)
> > Whilst i'm not suggesting this is an 'official channel' or whatever, i
> took
> > some initiative and started: a RWW Discord Channel[1].
> >
> > There is an old slack group that i'm aware of, but haven't logged into
> for
> > a long time; and, there's also IRC and other related resources...  But i
> > thought, discord - is fairly awesome...
> >
> > so,  i'll get your notifications if you join; and melvin (as chair) can
> > help figure out who be deemed 'admin' (and related procedural stuff, as
> to
> > 'practice as we preach' or intend to) should it be found to have
> usefulness
> > as an idea...
>
> Discord is a walled garden.  Free software, yes, but not federated data.
>
> I will therefore *not* participate on Discord - in case that matters.
>
> Not quite the same as discord, I know, but if there is a need for a chat
> system where messages are tracked as threads and are searchable, then I
> can recommend Matrix for that.
>

I'm fine with matrix...  Although, i note;  i've done some work defending
the rights of women & children (in particular) which has made me a target
via online environments for those involved in forms of abuse; that can't
really be spoken about or illustrated publicly online.  not in a way that's
compliant with 'dignity enhancing' considerations...   So, its kinda
important 'good' is able to be protected; rather than 'bad actors' who are
far better at that sort of profession, than those, who only end-up learning
about it whilst doing KYC/AML related works, that threaten those who don't
want their business models to be threatened and/or exposed...

if that makes sense...

lists as a medium, have particular qualities; i think 'endification' of
'who is talking' is important for these sorts of things / works (of global
significance, etc.); i think therein also, big disputes should be sorted
out by courts of law (not perverted) (notwithstanding the desire to never
allow a situation to require such a form of formal remedy / remediation);
and, that overall, anonymity is BS.

An earlier suggestion i made was to build an app that used beakerbrowser;
others illustrated have included the IRC channel & of course, the old Slack
channel (but i think, that'll cost money to keep the history of - so, not
so good).

I refuse to use Gitter.  It allows people to modify the history and distort
reality in ways that, i don't think are honourable.

Another potential option is to boot a https://github.com/zulip/zulip server
- and/or create a scalable environment (reference platform)? but i'm still
working on the document that talks about ideas that seeks to figure out how
to (economically) support people doing work for humanity (rather than a
company or government) in a sustainable way; which is likely to also then
in-turn, consider the cost of tools.

So - similarly to the comments made by Jonas (but in a different way); if
you want to exclude me - use gitter...

(nonetheless, the discord thing is now running, so...  i'm not trying to be
'king' here,. not at all)...

Timothy Holborn.


>
>  - Jonas
>
> --
>  * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
>  * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/
>
>  [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private