Very interesting article and lots of comments to read. Thank you. I found you following me and broused your blog.
This article caused my particular interest and so...
... here my thoughts:
We have all become far too good at advertising and marketing without realising it. I would not define Hive and the common activities as "communities". It is simply wrong to call something communal that follows very clear capitalist and profit-making rules. One just has to ask the question: How many people would be registered here and make an effort if there were no upvotes and wallets?
I am one such case, but I hardly think I count. I have been blogging and using comment functions on the internet long before the crypto platforms. In fact, when you are completely independent of income, blogging is the most enjoyable because it is detached from sustaining yourself. Once it becomes a source of income, everything starts to be a bit of a hassle: the expected regularity of publications, the feedback, the very presence. You have to think about where to delegate what, how to vote for whom, where to send your attention and before you know it, you have a full-time job that demands more than it gives.
You may earn a lot of money or make a good cut, but freedom gets lost at some point and is hardly worth talking about. With the disadvantage that does not occur in this way in the real world of work: You don't have any physical contact with the people, they're spread all over the world and even if it looks fun, it's just not the same to lift a beer together or to post "Beer-Lover". It's kind of a poor substitute and that's why online "communities" break down much faster than, for example, even loose and spontaneous communities like a carnival or shooting club or allotment gardeners who only organise something together seasonally but are guaranteed to meet again when there's a break of several months. That is hardly possible on the net.
Although I have fun here and have learned a lot about human thinking, but above all about the technology behind the cryptos, I would say that where it says "social media", there is rarely anything innovative to be found in it (though when it DOES, I find it great). Neither social media nor community really correspond to what is happening here online: it is an imitation of what we already know and have internalised from "out there": a construct built on external supply, capital and energy, which we would like to give the appearance of something communal and social, because firstly it sounds better and secondly it feels better.
My definition of community is this: it is a sharing and gifting community that cannot do without real material goods. These include food, shelter and companionship. These jointly provided services cannot be offset against each other and therefore there is no hand to bite, because it is always the many who would then have to be bitten, and that is simply not possible.
According to my definition, community is anarchy that does not establish any written rules, because the rule itself is based on principles that are not to be broken and that impose punishments or penalties for breaking the rules. However, this is already no longer an unwritten rule, but then it is a matter of laws which, because their observance is (have to be) controlled, are counterproductive.
As soon as a so-called community insists on compliance with rules, it loses itself in control instances and campaign work that cares more about its rules than about what the whole thing is for. A self-regulating system that can cope with inequality and conflict. In an anarchist community, what is fascinating and good is the tolerance of the most diverse participants: the crazy, the unadjusted, the eccentric, the outliers, precisely those who attract attention through unusual and irritating behaviour, but who are not cruel in doing so. But all the others who don't stand out, who follow rules and don't cause stress and trouble, are just as important and valuable for the functioning of the whole. In such a community garden there are no "weeds", but everything has value and significance.
Such a community only needs an adjustment here and there, hardly needs intervention, the culture that grows through it has strength precisely because it is "weak" in exercising control. It is therefore naturally very susceptible to pathological tendencies.
Bye from Germany to Australia (right?)