Ben Werdmuller

The other day I posed the question:

I've started two end-user open source social platforms: Elgg and Known, from the web2 desktop and mobile era respectively. Imagine I was going to create an open source community platform today. What would be different about it?

As you might imagine, I expected the answers to be broadly related to web3 and crypto: perhaps a decentralized platform where each community is interrelated and identity and reputation can be transferred.

But I really liked this reply from Colin Walker:

Everything on social networks is too easy — that's why I used to like Google+ when it launched. There was no API, no way to share something to the network from outside, everything had to be an intentional act.

There’s something really powerful about the idea of anti-virulence. Instead of optimizing around a platform’s K-Factor, we should make the conversation just hard enough to require a thoughtful reply.

The indieweb - blogging in general, actually - has this characteristic. You can’t just knock off a blog post in 10 seconds without time for your brain to kick in. It requires thought, but at the same time, you’re not writing an essay for the New Yorker. In other words, it requires just enough thought. It’s definitely the medium for me.

I wonder what a community platform that was centered around long-form thought would look like? Medium, perhaps? Or something else?

It should be obvious, but: Neil Young and Joni Mitchell’s decision to remove their content from Spotify to protest Joe Rogan’s ongoing covid disinformation is not censorship under the First Amendment or any other measure.

The First Amendment protects us from government censorship. It does not guarantee freedom from content filtering by any other entity. Spotify is not the government. A school board banning books about the Holocaust is a First Amendment issue; musicians threatening to leave a private service because of the content it hosts on one of its shows is not.

Every artist has the right to choose who and what their work is associated with. Spotify is, in effect, a private marketplace (albeit for attention). It’s completely reasonable for an artist to remove their goods from a marketplace because they don’t want to be associated with other goods made available there.

Young said exactly this in a statement on Friday:

“I support free speech. I have never been in favor of censorship. Private companies have the right to choose what they profit from, just as I can choose not to have my music support a platform that disseminates harmful information. I am happy and proud to stand in solidarity with the front line health care workers who risk their lives every day to help others.”

We all have a similar right to do what we want with our attention and our subscription dollars. If we enjoy Joe Rogan, great: we can choose to continue subscribing to Spotify. If we don’t, and consider the company’s support of misinformation that leads to unnecessary deaths to be immoral, we may wish to consider spending our money elsewhere.

If Spotify was to decide that it no longer wants to spread lies that kill people to bolster its profits, it still wouldn’t be a free speech issue. Rogan is free to keep publishing his work on the web and doubtless would find another avenue. The government is not telling him he can’t be heard, and most of his audience would likely follow him anywhere.

Activism and boycotts are a perfectly reasonable part of democratic society. You could argue that they’re a necessary part of a free market: businesses and customers have the right to make these decisions. To equate not wanting to financially support a toxic talk show with censorship is disingenuous at best.

It’s no secret that I’ve been pretty stressed out.

Someone I trust said that my writing lately has given the impression of “a man on the edge”. I think of it slightly differently - there’s a lot going on and I feel like I’m dealing with it in good humor - but I accept the idea and the intent behind it.

One of the most useful concepts I’ve been introduced to over the last couple of years is the Yerkes-Dodson curve. I’m not a psychologist, so please excuse my layman’s explanation: the idea is that we’re at peak performance when we have an optimal level of sensory arousal. Too little arousal and we’re maybe increasing our level of interest, but not in the zone yet; too much and we burn out quickly.

In contexts where there’s a lot going on, you’re already further along the curve. Because you’re nearer to burnout as a starting position, cognitive input that might ordinarily be okay has the potential to push you over the edge.

It’s a reductive explanation - again, I’m far from a psychologist - but I’ve found that it works for me. Applying this kind of structure to the process by which it all becomes too much has allowed me to think about what those cognitive inputs are, and to build in systems of control to keep myself on the straight and narrow.

I first put this to the test a couple of years ago. My mother’s condition had worsened, and I was feeling utterly overwhelmed, which was deeply affecting my performance at work.

At the same time, I’d become addicted to some game on my phone, and was traveling to and from New York a lot. I’d pick up my phone on the plane and play the game for an hour or two; depending on the day, I might play it a little in my AirBnb after work. There were a lot of notifications involved: lots of input.

In the scheme of things, the game was just a distraction. The big input was my mother’s terminally declining health, which was something that was always going to affect me psychologically, and wasn’t something I could or wanted to cut out of my life. (I can’t imagine what this would even have looked like.) Nonetheless, deleting the game dramatically improved my mental state. I was surprised, but it was undeniable: I was calmer, performed better at work, showed up more effectively for my family, and even had better sleep.

Abstracting this idea has resulted in a rudimentary system of control for my own stress. If I’m finding myself going over the edge - as happened this last week - I take stock of my inputs and reduce them. There are two more systemic solutions: find ways to become a more efficient processor of inputs (physical and mental exercise both help here), and create contexts for myself where there are fewer inputs overall.

Social media is one set of inputs. I’m going to try and take a break over the next month: removing all apps and logging myself out of the websites. It’s not that social media is bad, as such: it’s just one major set of cognitive inputs that can be removed. On the other hand, I find writing and blogging to be closer to a meditative process, so I’ll keep doing that. If I feel better at the end of the month, I’ll come back to social; otherwise I’ll leave it a little longer.

The same principle applies at work. The more chaotic and un-streamlined a process, the more cognitive inputs it produces, and the more stressed a team will be. Structure (or at least, the right amount of it) leads to predictability. Similarly, the more a process depends on ongoing meetings, the more inputs you receive during the workday. Zoom fatigue is both real and related to this principle: each meeting an input, each unscheduled meeting even more so. The more calm, reflective time I have, the more optimal my performance will be - which is, of course, different for everyone, because we all start at different places on the stress curve.

We’re still in the middle of a modern plague. Everyone’s stress level is higher than it would have been: not just because of the underlying context, but because many of us have lost family and friends. Creating conditions for our optimal well-being and performance means limiting stress, controlling our inputs, and more than anything, an intentionality that we might not have felt the need for before.

I was always a pretty good kid: good-natured, good in school, imaginative, and curious. I’d get up early every day to draw comic books before school; during the breaks between lessons on the school playground, I’d pretend I was putting on plays for astronauts. Afterwards, I’d muck about on our 8-bit computer, writing stories or small BASIC programs. I was a weird kid, for sure - nerdy long before it was cool, the third culture child of activist hippies - but relatively happy with it. I had a good childhood that I mostly remember very fondly.

Becoming a teenager also meant becoming the owner of a dark cloud that no-one else could see, which seemed to grow every day. By the time I was fifteen or sixteen, I would wake up some days without any energy or motivation at all. Sometimes, cycling home from my high school along the Marston Ferry Road in Oxford, a trunk road on one side and fields of cows on the other, I’d just stop. It was as if I was unable to move my feet on the pedals. I described it at the time as feeling like my blood had suddenly turned to water. There was nothing left inside me to go.

That feeling of nothingness inside me, like my fire had gone out, came into focus before I graduated from high school. I felt wrong. There was something irretrievably wrong about me - no, wrong with me - and everybody knew it, and nobody would tell me what it was.

At the same time, I discovered the internet. Whereas I’d come home as a kid to draw and write, as a teenager I’d connect to our dial-up Demon Internet connection and sync my emails and newsgroup posts before logging off again. I learned to build websites as a way to express myself. (Here’s one of my interminable and not-just-a-little-toxic teenage poetry collections, preserved for all eternity on the Internet Archive. You’re welcome.) Most importantly of all, I connected with new friends who were my age, over usenet newsgroups and IRC: two text mediums.

Somehow, when I was connecting with people over text, in a realm where nobody could see me or really knew what I looked like, I felt more free to be myself. Even when I met up with my fellow uk.people.teens posters - our collective parents were somehow totally fine with us all traveling the country to meet strangers by ourselves - I felt more like I could be confidently me, perhaps because I had already laid the groundwork of my friendships in a way that I had more control over. My family has always felt safe to me because I could just be me around them. I had a core group of very close school friends too, who I’m friends with to this day; people who I felt like didn’t judge me, and who I could feel safe around. In more recent years, some of those close friends have veered into conservative Jordan Peterson territory and anti-inclusion rhetoric, and it’s felt like a profound violation of that safety to a degree that I haven’t been able to fully explain until recently.

My connection to the internet - as in my personal connection, the emotional link I made with it - came down to that feeling of safety. I used my real name, but there was a pseudonymity to it; I was able to skate past all the artifice and pressure to conform of in-person society that had led me to feel wrong in the first place. On the web, I didn’t have that feeling. I could just be a person like everybody else. Being present in real life was effort; being online was an enormous weight off my shoulders.

Perhaps the reason I’ve come back to building community spaces again and again is because I remember that feeling of connecting for the first time and finding that the enormous cloud hanging over me was missing. That deep connection between people who have never met is still, for me, what the internet is all about. Or to put it another way, I’m constantly chasing that feeling, and that’s why I work on the internet.

Likewise, that’s what I’m looking for from my in-person connections. I want to feel like I can be me, and that I will be loved and accepted as I am. While I’ve found that in connections with all kinds of people, I’ve most often found that to be true in queer spaces: in my life, the people who have had to work to define their own identity are the most likely to accept people who don’t fit in.

It’s important to me: that deep, dark feeling of wrongness has never gone away. It’s under my skin at the office; it’s behind my eyes at family gatherings; it’s what I think about when I wake up at three in the morning. If we’re friends or family or lovers, I want to feel safe with you. I want to know that you accept me despite the wrongness, whatever the wrongness might be.

It might be that the relief the internet gave me also delayed my reconciliation with what the wrongness actually was.

When I was six years old, I cried and cried because my mother told me I wouldn’t grow up to be a woman. The feeling of not wanting to be myself has been with me as long as I can remember. I found beauty in people who were not like myself. There was much to aspire to in not being me.

Puberty gave me, to be frank, enormous mass. I was taller than everyone else, bigger than everyone else, by the time I was eleven or twelve. I towered over everyone by the time I was fourteen. I was bigger and hairier and smellier. In adulthood, the way one ex-girlfriend described it, my body isn’t just taller: it’s like someone has used the resize tool in Photoshop and just made me bigger, proportionally. I was never thin or athletic or dainty; I suddenly ballooned like the Incredible Hulk, but without the musculature.

I had felt wrong in my body before. Now, there was more of my body - a lot more - to feel wrong in.

So much of that dark cloud was my discomfort with my physicality: the meatspace experience of living as me. People started to tell me that I was easy to find in crowds, or made fun of the bouncy walk I developed as my limbs grew. They meant nothing by it, but it cut deep.

To this day, I recoil when I see a photo of myself alongside someone else. I hate it: there’s always this enormous dude ruining a perfectly good picture. It doesn’t even feel like me; it’s akin to when Sam Beckett looks into the mirror in Quantum Leap, or when Neo sees the projection of himself in The Matrix: Resurrections. The word, I’ve learned, is dysphoria.

I don’t know where to take that, or what it really means. I feel intense discomfort with my body and the physical manifestation of myself in the world. It’s not necessarily gender dysphoria - I don’t know - but it’s dysphoria nonetheless. I hate my body and it doesn’t feel like me.

What now?

The advent of the commercial internet must have been solace for a great many people in this way. It’s not unreasonable to say that it saved my life: not necessarily because I would have killed myself (although there have been times in my life, particularly when I was younger, when I’ve thought about it), but because I wouldn’t have found a way to build community and live with the authentic connections I did. I would have been hiding, fully and completely. Everyone deserves to not hide.

But because I’ve been living with one foot outside of the physical world, it’s also taken me a long time to understand that my feeling of wrongness was so tied into my physicality, and that my need to present differently was so acute.

I actually felt a little relief last year when I dyed my hair electric blue on a whim: it felt right in a way I wasn’t used to, perhaps because it was something under my control, or perhaps because it was a signal that I wasn’t the person I felt I had presented as up to then. The blue has long since faded and grown out into highlights, but some sense of the relief it brought remains. I have to wonder how I would feel if I did more to my body, and what it would take to make that dark cloud go away for good.

I think feeling good - no, feeling right - involves embracing that the feeling I’ve been experiencing my whole life is valid, and then exploring what it means in the real world. You’ve got to face it; you’ve got to give it a name.

There’s a TikTok trend that uses a line from a MGMT song to make a point about closeted queerness: ‌Just know that if you hide, it doesn't go away. It’s clear to me that the internet has been a godsend for people who don’t feel like they fit in, who need to find community that is nurturing for them, and who need to explore who they are. Removing that cognitive cloud is no small thing. But the next step is still the hardest: figuring out who you are, and finding out how to be yourself.

I’ve added two links to the bottom of every page on my website.

The first is to the IndieWeb webring: a directory of personal websites from people who are a part of the indieweb movement. These sites run the gamut of topics, but they’re mostly personal profiles from people who like to write on the web. Just like me! (You can click the left or right arrows to get to a random site.)

The second is to Blogroll.org, which I learned about from a post on Winnie Lim’s site. It’s exactly what you’d expect from the name: a categorized list of blogs. I love it and I’m glad it exists.

I want more of you to blog. Please write about your personal experiences! I want to read them! And doing it on your personal space is far better than simply tweeting, or using something like Facebook or (shudder) LinkedIn, simply because you can be more long-form, and build up a corpus of writing that really represents you. And sure, yes, Medium is fine. But I want to read what you have to say, and other people do too.

‌‌I’m posting Fairness Fridays: a new community social justice organization each week. I donate to each featured organization. If you feel so inclined, please join me.

This week I’m donating to Harmony Health Clinic. Based in Little Rock, Arkansas, Harmony Health Clinic “seeks to understand and serve the health and wellness needs of the medically uninsured and underserved who live in Pulaski County, by providing access to quality medical care at no cost to these patients in a private, community-based clinic, staffed by medical professional volunteers and marked by a unique atmosphere of caring, compassion, respect, dignity, and diversity.”

It describes its mission as follows:

[…] The Clinic’s founders are committed to advancing social justice through the provision of quality health care to those who are denied it by virtue of barriers such as socioeconomic status. We believe that universal access to decent health care is integral to the sanctity, development and enjoyment of life, and vital to an individual’s ability to fully realize one’s dignity and potential. Virtually every religious faith and major Christian denomination takes the position that access to decent health care is and should be recognized as a basic human right, and that the prevailing health care system in this country utterly fails to protect that right when it does not ensure adequate coverage for all Americans. Indeed, the United States of America stands virtually alone among all industrialized nations as the only country which does not provide health care coverage to all of its citizens.

As the pandemic progresses and health needs compound, I’m concerned about the impact on the most vulnerable, particularly in some of the most impoverished and unequal parts of the country. Harmony Health Clinic is one organization that is helping to alleviate these inequities.

I donated. If you have the means, I encourage you to join me here.

I found Harmony Health Clinic through the National Association of Free and Charitable Clinics, which provides support for the uninsured and underinsured nationwide. I donated to them, too, and I encourage you to do the same.