droqen's forum-shaped notebook

QuoteDo-ocracy (https://www.noisebridge.net/wiki/Do-ocracy) is a decentralized, anarchist way of deciding and managing how things get changed, and is the main way that things get done at Noisebridge.

It can be summed up as follows:

    Do-ocracy: If you want something done, do it, but remember to be excellent to each other when doing so.

In institutional conversations (https://newforum.droqen.com/index.php?topic=471) I wrote,
". . . think about every human activity as a conversation . . . a speaker speaks, someone or something listens"
"not in the tongue of words / but body language, warmth, art, movement // a conversation of everything"

'Speak' is perhaps objectively the wrong word to use in this context, but I wish to borrow the strength and specificity connoted by it, so I'm going to use it. 'Convey' could be used instead (Actions convey something), or 'express'. But the terrible juxtaposition of 'speak' is meant to show that though words are the medium of speech, they are not the content.

I had to write this tenet because I was thinking about games in which you are allowed to speak, or write, or type -- as compared to games in which you are not allowed to send message in the textual form. I believe that though we have this one medium of communication, a game without this form of communication is not an asocial game, but something else, if we are primed to understand it that way.

I concluded meaning, for a moment (https://letterclub.games/2023/04/05/meaning-for-a-moment/) by asking "what is it that we want our games to do to each other?"

That sentence was originally, was almost, "what do we want our games to say to each other?"
or even just, "what do we want to say to each other?"

I have some regret that the piece didn't end that way instead.

QuoteIf you want something done, do it, but remember to be excellent to each other respect and preserve all structure when doing so.

Hmm. It's not quite right. But there's something there that I will find.