UPDATE: they have dropped Persona!

[betree@framapiaf.org]

@nextgraph @liaizon @OpenSourceCollective On self-hosting: it's true that it's harder than it should be. The platform wasn't built with self-hosting in mind, and over the years we've added layers of business logic tightly coupled to our own instance. On top of that, our primary users are fiscal hosts. The platform's features are therefore oriented around these organizations which operate at a much larger scale. This is part of why self-hosting at the collective level feels so out of reach.

[andres4ny@social.ridetrans.it]

@sef I mean, probably the most famous example:
https://lwn.net/Articles/131657/

However, note that we're discussing building services for _ourselves_, not other people. We can throw together something that's extremely rough around the edges that scratches our itches, but isn't ready for the rest of humanity!

@nullagent @liaizon @scan

[betree@framapiaf.org]

@nextgraph @liaizon @OpenSourceCollective On GDPR: it does apply to us. Yes, we're a US-based non-profit (though most of our team is based in Europe), but several of the fiscal hosts on the platform are European. We take that obligation seriously. We'd like to get to a place where European users have their data stored in separate regional instances; this is on our roadmap.

[betree@framapiaf.org]

@nextgraph @liaizon @OpenSourceCollective We've applied for decentralization grants to help make it happen. We're a small team and prioritizing this alongside everything else is genuinely difficult.

All that said, we've already made real progress over the past few years: white-labeling work, consolidated data import/exports, and we're currently refactoring our ID system in a way that will also support better decentralization.

[betree@framapiaf.org]

@nextgraph @liaizon @OpenSourceCollective On infrastructure: yes, we run primarily on Heroku, which relies on AWS. This is a legacy decision the engineering team inherited, and moving away from it is non-trivial at our scale. Here again, the work we're doing around decentralization will hopefully help us spin up separate instances in Europe and progressively migrate what needs to be migrated.

[abekonge@venner.network]

@liaizon @jowek @ukrudt @tak @ruben @magnus

With an network of protesting collectives there are ways to escalate, one way could be:

* Write to all your collectives supporters and ask them to share the story.

[abekonge@venner.network]

@liaizon @jowek @ukrudt @tak @ruben @magnus

I wonder if there is a strategic consideration here:

1) Reach out to Open Collective & Open Source Collective in good faith with the letter and give them a chance to do something without a lot of fuss.

2) And then go more public.

---

[abekonge@venner.network]

@liaizon @jowek @ukrudt @tak @ruben @magnus

In general I would love to have a network of grassroots OC/OSC to pressure for stuff. e.g.

* Getting another payment processor than Stripe

[magnus@venner.network]

@abekonge @liaizon @jowek @ukrudt @tak @ruben I like escalation strategies like that. It gives Open Collective time to react before the shit hits the fan and then it gives us room for increasing the pressure if they don't

[abekonge@venner.network]

@liaizon @jowek @ukrudt @tak @ruben @magnus

Another issue is the whole governance issue - their 2022 stated goal for "Exit to Community" has resulted in:

"That vision became reality in 2024, when stewardship of the platform transitioned to a new nonprofit: the Open Finance Consortium Inc. (OFiCo), a U.S. 501(c)(6) association created by and for the fiscal hosts and communities who rely on it.

OFiCo now governs the platform collectively, while its subsidiary OFi Technologies (OFiTech) operates the platform. Together, they continue the original Open Collective mission: enabling transparent, collaborative finance for communities everywhere."

What does "govern the platform collectively" mean?

The OFi Consortium site says they are "community governed", and then later, that they are formed by 5 organisations including Open Collective Europe and Open Source Collective, that "represent thousands of Collectives and guide our strategic direction".

I'm in several collectives that are fiscally hosted by Open Collective Europe, and I have never been asked to "guide their strategic direction" in any real governance sense. And looking through their (OCE) site - there is nothing I can find about hosted collectives having governance. For me "exit to community" means that the community, in this case, the collectives, have governance - but I don't see it.

Am I missing something?

This is probably next-step stuff. But it is a lingering question I have had for a while. I have a good relationship with OCE, and I believe they are well-meaning. My worry is that if there is no real community governance, then it becomes "community-washing" instead of "community-governance".

[abekonge@venner.network]

@jowek @ukrudt @tak @ruben @magnus

Your original thread @liaizon, would be a good starting point for a letter draft I think ...

[wtebbens@social.coop]

@liaizon I am profoundly worried about age verification and more so to see @opencollective join the Peter Thiel backed Persona.

We're here together precisely to fight against these techbros, to resist tech monopolies and surveillance capitalism, to help people become autonomous and assure basic human values as privacy and solidarity.

We should be able to give donations without becoming part of the authoritarian tech stack? Well that's what we work on together. So let's hope OpenCollective reverts course.

[sef@social.coop]

@Andres4NY I see, I suppose that’d be the fully existing although under-utilized LiberaPay in this case.

@nullagent @liaizon @scan

[sef@social.coop]

@sef LP hardly resembles OC though, of which the ease of invoicing and reimbursements happen through its pretty unique ecosystem of fiscal hosts. The fiscal host system is basically a regulatory loophole, bound to be either shut down or regulated massively.

@Andres4NY @nullagent @liaizon @scan

[sef@social.coop]

@Andres4NY @nullagent @liaizon @scan Perhaps I’m exaggerating, but it seems to me that FOSS people slept on this particular itch a decade too long turning it into a festering wound in that we’re out of options wrt decent payment rails. Another frontend for PayPal or Stripe isn’t going to change that. Only two options I see are setting up foundations for the most vital projects or slip into full regulatory evasion mode, none of which seem very feasible.

[benjaoming@social.data.coop]

@malte @liaizon If all the fiscal hosts are free to choose whatever KYC provider they want, why did Open Source Collective choose Persona? And isn't Open Source Collective (the fiscal host) the same people running Open Collective (the platform), just wearing different hats to let us know that the KYC integration developed by OC has nothing to do with what KYC that OSC chooses?

(abbreviations used on purpose to emphasize the silliness of OC finger-pointing at OSC)

[alxndr@tech.lgbt]

@Li @Betree @opsocket @liaizon This.

You know what they say about people who are "agnostic" to fascists...

[db0@hachyderm.io]

@liaizon @scan I'm glad I'm not using it for my FOSS projects, but I'm afraid the others like liberapay and ko-fi will be eventually be strong-armed by the US-controlled banking system to do the same.

[alxndr@tech.lgbt]

@liaizon Hey @CryptPad, Open Collective is voluntarily integrating a fascist surveillance tool. Would a subscription on your official instance support you in the same way as an OC contribution?

#Surveillance #Fascism

[liaizon@social.wake.st]

@db0 that actually reminds me that that reaching out to their competitors for "a take" isn't a bad idea