I’m on your boat, but I don’t think there is any reason to oversell yourself as the pioneer of the social web with statements which are blatantly false. If anyt

I’m on your boat, but I don’t think there is any reason to oversell yourself as the pioneer of the social web with statements which are blatantly false. If anything that will only hinder the mission of what you’re trying to achieve. To me it’s so unnecessary to sell the project as being run by the inventors of the social web, when the mission to decentralise control over social networks is brilliant on its own. I still don’t think any elected officials in Denmark should be on social networks where they don’t control the policies. I don’t agree with some of the outrageous stuff some of our less professional right wing politicians post on social media which gets them banned, but the very fact that a foreign tech company can chose to ban elected officials is just wrong. It would be much better if our Government ran something like a fediverse instance where they would control it and still reach the wider social network. I frankly think any news organisation should run their own server instances as well. That is a good mission. I’ll support anyone who works for it, but I also think it’s stupid to over present yourself with false claims.