I don't see much issue with using the term in the sense defined by the W3C[0], particuarly for a group developing technology around that definition. It doesn't

I don't see much issue with using the term in the sense defined by the W3C[0], particuarly for a group developing technology around that definition. It doesn't mean the term can't also have a broader/colloquial meaning (web that is social). Same with the semantic web. > shit on everything else that’s been the social web > fuck this noise > it’s astonishingly brazen for ActivityWeb partisans to move to claim the banner for themselves Maybe this hostility towards their use of the term stems largely from already being in a position of resentment towards them? It seems disproportionate to me when as far as I can tell it's a non-profit group with positive goals, and I've heard positive things of those involved, but maybe I'm missing some reason to hate them? [0]: https://www.w3.org/TR/social-web-protocols/ https://www.w3.org/TR/social-web-protocols/