@hamishcampbell Would you mind elaborating why my funding project proposal is not a fit, considering:

"
Policy language travels further, when we push for small “wild funding” streams. Instead of demanding institutional transformation, push for small structural openings:

microgrants
low-bureaucracy funding
experimental tracks
funding for governance experiments, not just technical deliverables.
"

in https://hamishcampbell.com/the-eu-opportunity-and-danger-what-grassroots-projects-can-offer/ ?

It checks all those boxes.

Most people are socially regulated, not internally self-modeled.

Their sense of self is maintained by roles, routines, and external feedback.

Some people build an internal operating system instead: explicit, examined, coherent in isolation.

Neither is fake.
But when networked systems meet internal ones, the mismatch often reads as “untrustworthy”.

That’s not malice. It’s pattern mismatch under stress.

#philosophy #psychology #identity #socialdynamics

Humans use heuristics to assess trust.

When people don’t understand someone, they unconsciously check:

- emotional congruence
- narrative simplicity
- familiarity of behavior
- physical presentation
- social alignment

When you are:

- cognitively different
- internally referenced
- precise or abstract
- non-performative
- worn down physically from stress

you break the heuristic.

#Psychology #SocialDynamics #Neurodiversity #Cognition

@hamishcampbell My first guess would be the tone and my first perceived image when you have sent me the first links was: this is very aggresive, street level activist like, bordering at extremism and I don't know if it is safe for me to be involved with this.

If whoever responsible for funding felt even slightly the same way, then most likely that was the reason for rejection.

@hamishcampbell By the way, if you manage to extract and organize information and ideas from your blog, that would not only help clarity and seeding, but also could be an income stream (book) which you could use for your goals. Or release it for free.

@hamishcampbell This conversation and the others could have looked very different.

I can't see any positive motivation for you having me doing all the circling, asking me to post on openworlds, just to be dismissive everywhere and avoid answering questions.

It looks like discursive capture, consensus laundering, soft-gatekeeping, moral leverage control and narrative control.

And why do that with someone who wants to make a difference, understand, help, and provides possible solutions?

@hamishcampbell You claim to be tired of circling, yet you have sent me on a ride through mastodon posts and two repos on openworlds website, while not providing direct answers to my questions and being mostly dismissive.

You seem to be aware that a lot of misunderstandings come from different wordings and language, yet are not willing to be more explicit with someone who has put so much time and effort into familiarizing himself with all of this and trying to understand it?

@hamishcampbell Why are you coming from assumption that doing archeology on the blog is the right approach, instead of listing the work being done and extracting the core information from the articles in a more processable and presentable way?

Why actively hide and obstruct all of this?

The circling here happens mostly because of this.

If the point of the blog is seeding change, why do it in a way that will discard and confuse almost everyone? How is this not encouraging circling?

@hamishcampbell I am not arguing against lack of past work, I am asking what is currently being done in terms of physical projects and what are the direct benefits of that.

Maybe the lack of action in those is a direct effect of the issue that I am pushing for?

If the assumption is for the action to be purely intellectual, then I would argue for shifting focus towards survivability, which would then bring more people, which would make tools happen.

@hamishcampbell Maybe the one exception could be doing the resource generating projects the spartan way, so the next ones don't have to be.

I have also not received answer to what projects and tools emerged from OMN so far, that are active.

What messy work exactly is currently happening?

@hamishcampbell I have answered that the minimum ethical approach for OMN would be to provide guides for people on how to find the resources and how to make a living while contributing.

I have also mentioned that if people are expected to find the information and make sense out of it by digging through multitude of posts and websites, then it ignores the reality that most people don't have time or energy for this. Not that this invalidates the existence of the blog for example.

@hamishcampbell Couldn't the same argument be used towards OMN, 4opens and your personal blog?

@hamishcampbell I have suggested one possible solution. However, currently I will not be able to work on it by myself, as I have other responsibilities.

I would be able to work on that only if there are more people involved and the entire work does not fall just on me.

@hamishcampbell The issue here is that ignoring safety and income actively worsens the situation.

Systems that rely on unpaid work don’t just fail to solve power asymmetry, they intensify it.

Which is visible in how open source made it harder for individuals to earn a living while benefiting large corporations.

Unless the “how” of compensation and protection is made a first-class concern, the existence of open source, OMN, and 4opens does not mitigate harm, it amplifies it.

Long after making it, it finally became useful for more than avoiding to type 'sway --unsupported-gpu'.

Turns out some software on linux doesn't work well with tiling compositors. Some doesn't work well with Wayland desktops. Some doesn't work with some X11 desktops for no apparent reason, but does work with different X11 desktops.

https://github.com/warmsignull/desktop

#Linux #LinuxDesktop #Wayland #X11 #TilingWM #OpenSource

@hamishcampbell This relies on metaphor rather than mechanism.

The critique is not judging a seed for not being a tree.

It is examining first-step effects: signaling, tone, moral pressure, and who bears cost while survivability is deferred.

Those questions apply precisely at the seed stage and are not answered by invoking growth metaphors.

@hamishcampbell This reframes structural critique as psychological comfort and ideological purity.

That is not a rebuttal.

Naming incentives, power effects, and harm distribution is not avoiding compromise, it is part of responsible practice.

This post does not engage the critique, it reassigns it a motive and moves on.

@hamishcampbell Structural critique is not paranoia.

Naming incentives, power effects, and predictable failure modes does not require mistrust or fear.

Conflating analysis with paranoia risks discouraging the very feedback that prevents informal control and myth making.

@hamishcampbell I think we are now talking past each other.
My point concerns signaling, tone, and how present constraints are interpreted while survivability is deferred, not funding sources or delaying commons building.
I will leave it here.

Common issues in debates worth watching for:

- deferral
- avoidance
- reframing instead of rebuttal
- dismissal without engagement
- mislocation of the critique
- redefinition replacing argument
- blame shifting
- authority asserted without detail
- avoidance of commitment and accountability
- recentring authority and audience

These patterns tend to avoid commitment and accountability.