jcdenton.cast pfp
jcdenton.cast
@jc
Thinking about a network state protocol that allows you to fork communities when you disagree. Many communities today are run by a leadership which safeguard their setup (e.g. private software and heavy moderation). Thoughts on a protocol designed for easy exit and fork of communities, like a fork button? cc @balajis.eth
14 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
jcdenton.cast pfp
jcdenton.cast
@jc
We've seen this in Mastadon already, heavy handed moderation where all you can do is pack up your bags and leave. In open source software, you can fork code, but with communities you cannot fork data https://twitter.com/LefterisJP/status/1593934653114785793
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zico pfp
zico
@zico
isn't this essentially what decentralized social is? you can take your email list across platforms, you should be able to do the same with social networks. even better if you could condense your following across platforms into one list (twitter, clubhouse, farcaster would be my stack).
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
David Meyreles pfp
David Meyreles
@systemdm
@nouns
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
1723 šŸŽ© pfp
1723 šŸŽ©
@1723
And the network state or community ā€œprotocolā€ makes it so that after the fork, anyone can see the diff between the community or network states for comparison
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Patrick Atwater pfp
Patrick Atwater
@patwater
Huh how would that work if thereā€™s a geographic component This reminds me of smbc s poly state btw
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
wartime art hoe pfp
wartime art hoe
@ivy
practically one or a few people will disagree enough to build something new, the the majority won't be doing the 'forking' themselves but just migrating to follow community leaders
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
wartime art hoe pfp
wartime art hoe
@ivy
i don't think this is protocol'able, over the history of the internet there have been a lot of community forks like: something awful > 4chan reddit > voat (largely unsuccessful) i think the essential element is portable followers, that way people can easily vote when community leaders leave/enter new spaces
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
castig pfp
castig
@castig.eth
I dig that. We were thinking of something like that for Console. Perhaps all the settings, and chats would duplicate? But I'd worry you'd end up with 20+ copy forks, and it could be difficult for newcomers to know which is the legit real one. Kind of like when there were 10 forks of BTC in 2019. Thoughts?
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Nico.castšŸŽ© pfp
Nico.castšŸŽ©
@n
Are DAOs the predecessors of Network States?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Michael Calvey pfp
Michael Calvey
@calvey
You might end up with perverse incentives that keep protocols/ communities from ever becoming large enough to have serious sway. Pretty hard (impossible?) to get large numbers of people to agree. Something Iā€™m obviously overlooking here is the question of what warrants a fork. Is it multi-dimensional?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Alex Miller pfp
Alex Miller
@alexlmiller
The challenge here is more thoughtfulness of new community leaders around community building rather than the technical limitations That said crypto identity does present an opportunity for making this feasible in a way that you canā€™t with web2 databases
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
anett.eth pfp
anett.eth
@anett
Community is being built organically - bring something unique on the table, provide individual experience for members You canā€™t fork it like code on GitHub
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Sean Bonner šŸ”„ pfp
Sean Bonner šŸ”„
@seanbonner.eth
Communities are people, not code. If you disagree with people you canā€™t just fork them. You donā€™t like how a community is being run you can go start your own, but you canā€™t tell a community you disagree with their organizational decisions and expect them to be carbon copied into your personal revision.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Tom2o17 pfp
Tom2o17
@tom2o17
This is sick
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction