@FediverseSymbol Nice symbol. Do you also have a proposal to replace the term Fediverse? I know many people, me included, who don't want to or cannot use it as a term in political debates, myself included.
Social Web was once one proposal, Open Socials is another. Maybe you've heard of other alternative naming that is more accessible in its name does not put the effort into a niche?
Now that the discussion has settled a bit, I'm able to return here for more elaboration.
I'm drawing in my criticism from previous conversations and personal experience. Let me start with the latter.
At first, the -verse suffix is an anglism and only contributes to the hegemonial project of global harmonisation and hegemony of americanised culture. Native speakers or those that don't speak other languages may not be aware.
Then there is the … 1/
childish suffix of the prefix, the -i in Fedi. It's a diminutive that makes it sound like a toy from the queer nerds to tinker and play with, but not like a reliable infrastructure for society to uphold democracy and diverse discourse.
Attention: Here I'm not saying that I'm trying to eradicate the queer history of creating self-governed online spaces for autonomous organisation of oppressed communities. I am talking about how the term can be used effectively in talking with regular people … /2
to transport a semantic component that produces respect and understanding for the technical achievement, while leaning in to how people are going to use it.
Which brings us to the prefix fed-. It has been said in other places, that it has very specific connotations in the anglican language space, but this is even irrelevant for the international context. Here, as exemplified above, we are pushing a syntactic element from a specific language into a global conversation, which is already … /3
dominated by said language.
While those who know what federation means and who actually care will still be able to eventually coincide the term with the meaning, again, regular people will most probably not dare to care. They are those people, who just use technology and whom we serve as being developers and providers for them.
I'm not going to be able to explain to my parents what a fantastic thing a Fediverse is, but maybe what the social web is ("Like email!") and that it is … /4
constituted by the acts and resources mobilised by people in self-relying, "autonomous" communities which choose to talk to each other.
Fediverse as a term leans in to a naming scheme, which may be established in the English speaking world, but can appear very random to non-natives. Esp. those who have not consumed much anglican cultural produce in their lives and are not used to this linguistic practice.
The neighbourhood with Metaverse also puts it into the corner of shiny marketing terms /5
which are used as a stand-in for the actual thing at play. And that is not the technical implementation ("federation"), not a childish diminutive to make it appear more appealing and also not an anonymous, ungraspable space of infinite expanse.
In Marxist terms, it's still a material infrastructure (means of production) that is produced by actual people and communities (modes of production). It's easy to forget, because our society relies on the fetish of the commodity to sell goods. Knowing /6
this we can adapt.
With my rejection of the term I am marking a position in the discourse. I am not needing to provide an answer to the supposed problem. But maybe I was giving enough good _reasons_ for why _using_ the term Fediverse is much harder than looking at its artifacts, the word and the thing it describes.
It's just not a useful vessel in many situations, where other aliases are needed.
There are more discussions like this:
- https://mastodon.social/@shoq/112747784490547334
- https://tldr.nettime.org/@tante/113000024186013430
6/6
@[email protected] It's a name that sounds dumb and is overloaded with so much historic baggage and toxic patterns of behavior that I don't want it to stick around. I want something to emerge from its ashes.
I don't know if the name is the most urgent/important issue of the (still) fediverse.
But I think it is interesting to discuss. I never understood how much effort is put into logos and other stuff, but apparently, many people think it matters. And although I don't feel the same, I have to consider that they might be right (corporations and politicians wouldn't invest so many resources if it wasn't important).
+1 for mentioning that the anglo-american dominance of social media is an issue we have to deal with
So, in any case, thanks for the perspective 
(felt like this had to be said here, too)
The open web is amazing. So we keep saying in our little subculture, e.g. at #xoxo on the weekend or all over the #fediverse and #indieweb. And generally are met with incomprehension outside of our little subculture. IMHO that's because we are not saying **why** the open web is amazing. I think it all boils down to: "on the open web, I can be much more creative, with minimum expense, than elsewhere, and so easily share my creations with the world."
"...childish suffix of the prefix, the -i in Fedi... It's a diminutive that makes it sound like a toy from the queer nerds to tinker and play with, but not like a reliable infrastructure for society to uphold democracy and diverse discourse."
It isn't diminutive at all. It's just the same as the i in universe. Many languages have a similar word for universe which includes the i. (And, by the way, because of that overlap, those other languages can create their own word for Fediverse pretty easily.)
I'm unsure if this thread is satire or not?
@yala
Wenn ich in deutsch bleibe sag ich einfach #fediversum oder noch krasser unfremdeld Födiversum (😁) dazu , so wie ich auch sonst nicht "universe" sage nornaler Weise - aber neige doch eher an anderen Stellen zu Übertreibungen für gewöhnlich..
Der Punkt mit dem textfreundlichen unicode hat aber was ⁂ . Nach dem Einwand mit dem unverbundenen Sternen fand erste Suche noch ꙮ 🤔
@lunch @raphael @FediverseSymbol
@tomw I don't feel a generic rejection needs any justification. As a first, I just don't like the term.
My reasons for that can be debatable, but not the sentiment.
@tomw Hey Tom, I've tried to be a bit more specific in this thread:
https://degrowth.social/@yala/113016284424703730
Maybe you can follow some of my arguments. I'd also like to know which ones of those you would reject. Could you give me a little response here, if we are actually talking about the same problematic?
Thanks!
hi @[email protected] and @[email protected] Now that the discussion has settled a bit, I'm able to return here for more elaboration. I'm drawing in my criticism from previous conversations and personal experience. Let me start with the latter. At first, the -verse suffix is an anglism and only contributes to the hegemonial project of global harmonisation and hegemony of americanised culture. Native speakers or those that don't speak other languages may not be aware. Then there is the … 1/ @[email protected]
@tkk13909 Hey Krafty! Nice asterism you have in your handle.
Thanks for being open to change the name! I wouldn't even know where to start with, but I'm also not trying to find answers. I'm rather trying to find questions and aspects to look at.
The ones that are accessible to me I've written down in this thread:
https://degrowth.social/@yala/113016284424703730
Do these arguments qualify as reasons for you enough to be considered in the debate?
hi @[email protected] and @[email protected] Now that the discussion has settled a bit, I'm able to return here for more elaboration. I'm drawing in my criticism from previous conversations and personal experience. Let me start with the latter. At first, the -verse suffix is an anglism and only contributes to the hegemonial project of global harmonisation and hegemony of americanised culture. Native speakers or those that don't speak other languages may not be aware. Then there is the … 1/ @[email protected]
Not that I'm advocating any changes, but if you look at the definition, then the Fediverse is actually *not* a federation, in which there is a central entity to which the others are subordinate.
Perhaps the "Confediverse" would have been a better term 😜 Then it could easily morph into "Confettiverse" which is even better! 🎊
@ditol Thanks Ditol for asking! This was probably my first "flamewar"-like wave of responses, where I couldn't follow up anymore with all the puns, jokes and sarcasm being flooded towards me! 😂
In a more serious note, I have tried to elaborate on my _reasons_ for rejecting the term Fediverse as a vessel to convey; yes, which meaning again? Read on:
hi @[email protected] and @[email protected] Now that the discussion has settled a bit, I'm able to return here for more elaboration. I'm drawing in my criticism from previous conversations and personal experience. Let me start with the latter. At first, the -verse suffix is an anglism and only contributes to the hegemonial project of global harmonisation and hegemony of americanised culture. Native speakers or those that don't speak other languages may not be aware. Then there is the … 1/ @[email protected]
Fediverse Symbol ⁂
jon r
raphaël ⁂ bastide
lunchy
Snaked57
Greg
⁂Krafty⁂ #NoKings
Earthworm 🐌
Latte macchiato 
sorry, but what
Dr. Quadragon ❌
FediThing 
AlexTECPlayz
Schlüssellochkind 👁️
tort 
Tom Walker
Deus
The OwlChemist
Stephen 🦇
Ditol
Danu
Ur Ya'ar
Writing Slowly
RamenCatholic 🐢🌈