Bix Frankonis does not agree with my analysis of the Fediverse and the Social Web Foundation. For him, much of the issue relates to appropriation of the "social web" name:
"Like many trade groups, this one is named and self-described in a manner deliberately meant to capture and colonize an entire area. To become, in effect, synonymous with what its name names. It shits on twenty-five years of the web."
He's obviously entitled to his opinion, but I personally think it's a stretch to say that it shits on 25 years of the web. Of course there was a social web before the Fediverse - I'm a long-term indieweb participant and an even more long-term blogger. But I don't think that precludes this name, which is more of a bet on one embodiment of the future of the social web.
But here's what I really love: this conversation is playing out across platforms, across blogs, and across sites. In many ways, it's an illustration in itself of what the web is, and why blogging remains wonderful.
[Link]
· Links · Share this post
I’m writing about the intersection of the internet, media, and society. Sign up to my newsletter to receive every post and a weekly digest of the most important stories from around the web.