If not being mistaken, that was the very topic of Rysiek in the last fsfe summit "Free Software and the Network Effect: fight it or ride it?"
For me one important thing is this: If you want to invite people to opensource then you need somehow to reach them! On 06/21/2017 05:47 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote: > > On 21/06/17 12:22, Erik Albers wrote: > >> Now I would be interested what you think? Do you think that - although the >> use >> of proprietary platforms is ethically not supportable - the chances of >> convincing new people to use and further Free Software are worth the >> punishment? >> Or do you think that our message should not occur on platforms like Facebook >> or Twitter at all, because it contradicts our efforts in getting people to >> use >> decentralized services, run with Free Software and therefore potentially harm >> us in the long run? >> > I feel there are a whole range of questions and topics that arise. > > You mention efforts to get people to use decentralized services. One > trap that arises in these discussions is that people believe it is a > choice between Facebook vs some other technology. The reality is that > before facebook, many movements succeeded in the real world through > grass roots campaigns and word of mouth and that still works just as > well today, maybe even better. A booth in a local market, church fair > or library, one-on-one discussions with leaders in the local community, > asking questions at a town hall meeting are all real-world examples. > > When comparing to facebook, etc, these are some of the other things that > come to mind: > > - how much time is spent getting messages into the platform, maintaining > buddy lists, updating privacy settings every time they change? > > - do we have the ability to control where replies go, e.g. getting > people to respond on an email list, or does the platform insist that we > use their mailboxes and built-in communications channels? Do they make > it impossible to disable their internal messaging tools, meaning we end > up losing more time every day checking for replies in every platform? > > - how many people actually see what is posted on facebook, if it is not > buried under all the other content on the platform, including paid > advertising, cat photos and baby photos from the friends who actually > use the platform? If somebody only looks once per week, is the > probability they see a post from FSFE even close to 1 in 100? > > - are the people who take an hour out of every day to browse facebook > really the people we want to influence? Is it better to look for > channels that reach more busy and influential people? > > - is the "viral" campaign just a myth or an improbable outcome like > winning the lottery? Do the majority of campaigns on social media put > in more effort than the reward they get back? > > - will users who want to use facebook copy our content to the platform > anyway, making it unnecessary for FSFE to directly post things there? > > - if FSFE has an official presence on those platforms, are we endorsing > them? What impact does that have on our credibility? > > - systems like facebook are made by the establishment, for the > establishment. Zuckerberg is a regular at Bilderberg these days. This > brings me to the age old question: can you change the system by using > the rules the system gives you? People like the Bolsheviks and Gandhi > didn't exactly think so. > > Regards, > > Daniel > > _______________________________________________ > Discussion mailing list > Discussion@lists.fsfe.org > https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list Discussion@lists.fsfe.org https://lists.fsfe.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
