Home | Notifications | New Note | Local | Federated | Search | Logout

Note Detail

Reply to @strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz
Strypey@strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz (2026-04-15 09:56:40)
Take music publishing as an example. If artists commit to making bandwagon.fm the primary online home for their music, they need to be sure that it will continue to exist, and they will get plenty of notice before it's shut down. Which means the people running it need to have a plan for how they will cover the costs of storing and serving a growing collection of music files, long term. 

(8/?)
---Reply---
Strypey@strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz (2026-04-15 10:03:31)
We all know about the ways tech founders have sold their souls for funding to keep their platforms online; ads, Venture Capital, acquisition by corporations, or becoming one (IPO). Obviously we need ethical alternatives for social web services.

But not just alternative funding models. We also need alternative governance models, which keep the operators of services accountable to the people using them.

(9/?)

---Replies---

Strypey@strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz (2026-04-15 10:13:51)
A service like bandwagon.fm could be a co-op, owned by the artists whose music it hosts. It could be a social enterprise, whose constitution prioritises the needs of those artists over the financial interests of owners.

But however its governance is structured, one of the best ways to keep services accountable is the freedom to leave. So social publishing services need to enable publishers to use their own domain names for account and post URLs, and provide full account export.

(10/?)