# SX: Sustainable ecosystem evolution (SEE) **URL:** \ **Category:** SX solution development\ **Tags:** sx, research, evolution\ **Created:** [April 13, 2026, 11:35pm UTC](https://discuss.coding.social/t/sx-sustainable-ecosystem-evolution-see/836 "2026-04-13T23:35:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 2
**Author:** ![aschrijver](https://discuss.coding.social/user_avatar/discuss.coding.social/aschrijver/32/3_2.png) [@aschrijver](https://discuss.coding.social/u/aschrijver)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2026, 9:44am UTC](https://discuss.coding.social/t/sx-sustainable-ecosystem-evolution-see/836/2 "2026-04-14T09:44:30Z")
## Sustainability criteria of the fediverse FEP Process? I created a topic on SocialHub relating to [misunderstandings](https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/grassroots-open-standards-for-fediverse-evolution/8637/4?u=aschrijver) about my thoughts on FEP sustainability. > **[šŸ«‚ Commons custodians. Help increase FEP Sustainability and progress](https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/commons-custodians-help-increase-fep-sustainability-and-progress/8640)** > > Sustainable ecosystem evolution ā–¶ Click to expand the Alt-text to the diagram. ā„¹ Ā This topic relates to Grassroots open standards for fediverse evolution and Sustainable ecosystem evolution which are applied research topics of Social... > **Click to expand the archived version of the SocialHub discussion in this note-taking forum.** > > > ā„¹  This topic relates to [Grassroots open standards for fediverse evolution](https://social.coop/@smallcircles/116379158584600016) and [Sustainable ecosystem evolution](https://discuss.coding.social/t/sx-sustainable-ecosystem-evolution-see/836) which are _applied research_ topics of Social experience design (SX). > > > > SX follows a sustainability-first approach dedicated to bridge the gap between **hard technology space** of the Social web developer ecosystem, which represents a pure technosphere, and Social web where the people are, fedizens in the sociosphere. The simple credo and vision of [Social coding commons](https://coding.social), a grassroots movement, aims to .. > > > > šŸŒˆ _[Reimagine ā€œSocialā€](https://coding.social/blog/reimagine-social/) and **Realize our dreams** of a šŸ«‚ [**peopleverse**](https://coding.social/blog/grassroots-evolution/#fediverse-tomorrow) thatā€™s inclusive to all people_. > > > ā„¹   **See also** : The [differences of opinion](https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/grassroots-open-standards-for-fediverse-evolution/8637/3?u=aschrijver) on FEP sustainability that led me to create this topic. > > ### Sustainability risk: Chisms in grassroots standardization process? > > A wicked problem in chaotic commons is that everyone does their own things, goes their own direction, and the power of the commons remains dormant, and directionless, unfocused. The commons then represents an inert gas that can make no fist against the forces it rallies against and wants to protect itself from. The following quotes from @silverpill makes me wonder how they relate to the stance and position of the FEP within the larger ecosystem. For any open standard, thus also for a [Grassroots standard](https://coding.social/blog/grassroots-evolution/#grassroots-open-standards) the people, esp. potential adopters and implementers need clarity on that. > > > @silverpill [wrote](https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/how-to-participate-in-the-w3c-working-groups-on-ap/8479/2): > > To join Meta and SocialWebFoundation which is being funded by [scammy crypto companies](https://web.archive.org/web/20260208122322/https://interledger.org/news/interledger-foundation-awards-200000-social-web-foundation-support-decentralized-social-media)? > > > @silverpill [wrote](https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/how-to-participate-in-the-w3c-working-groups-on-ap/8479/6): > > I donā€™t care much about the ā€œofficialā€ version of AP. It is outdated and increasingly irrelevant, most of the real development happens elsewhere. > > I am not here to question personal opinions and principled stances, which I respect and honor. I am a long-time anti-BigTech [humane technology advocate](https://community.humanetech.com/u/aschrijver/summary) myself, and consider fediverse a humane tech field lab of sorts. I want to keep it ā€œfor the people, by the peopleā€ which was and is the principled stance Iā€™ve always and still follow today. > > The FEP is effectively run as a typical FOSS project, and on a basis of [ā€œdo-ocracyā€](https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/do-ocracy) - _" An organization in which power and responsibility are held by those who do the most work."_ which is the same basis that sees me take the initiative to follow-up on [matters of long-term FEP sustainability](https://discuss.coding.social/t/grassroots-open-standards-for-fediverse-evolution/834/4) right now. > > - How does the FEP Process consider its relation to W3C and bottom up standardization? > - To what extent do stance and positioning of the FEP align with ecosystem participants? > - Which risks to position of the FEP as a standards body do exist now, and in the future? > - How do we deal with them if serious matters arise, and how can we mitigate these risks? > - How can the FEP Process guarantee the [shared responsible ownership](https://coding.social/blog/shared-ownership/) that exists today? > - Is the notion of a [3-stage bottom up standardization process](https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/3-stage-standards-process-guaranteeing-an-open-and-decentralized-ecosystem/3602) still acknowledged by FEP today? > > ### Sustainability risk: Can FEP Process induce [shared (technology) vision](https://discuss.coding.social/t/challenge-adopt-a-shared-technology-vision-for-the-fediverse/45)? > > In my call-for-reflection on grassroots ActivityPub developer ecosystem I provided my thoughts on the extent to which fediverse is able to represent [The Future of the Social networking](https://coding.social/blog/grassroots-evolution/#fediverse-tomorrow). > > Any healthy ecosystem needs to foster and have a general consensus on a shared (technology) vision. I addressed the lack thereof in 2022 in my notes on [major challenges that ail the fediverse](https://discuss.coding.social/t/major-challenges-for-the-fediverse/67), which are all social in nature.. > > See: [Challenge: Adopt a shared (technology) vision for the Fediverse](https://discuss.coding.social/t/challenge-adopt-a-shared-technology-vision-for-the-fediverse/45) > > - Should the FEP play an active role in fostering shared vision to encourage cohesion? > - Is it enough to be a neutral process open to anyone, or reject non-aligned FEP submissions? > - Is FEP Process sufficiently prepared for controversial submissions, able to avoid ā€œdramaā€? > > * * * > > With this topic I hope to open this general discussion, which should imho become part of a continual monitoring process of well-known (SX) sustainability criteria that the FEP Process evolves. ![Image with a call-to-action to "Join the FEP do-ocracy today. Help make peopleverse happen! There are vacancies for Commons custodians of the fediverse. Ping the FEP team and ask where you can volunteer". The call is followed by the image of a Delft-blue wisdom tile, with the quoted text "If we all did our part, our wicked problems would dissolve". Below 2 cent emoji's and a quote are displayed "Invest in your dreams to make them happen", the credo of the Social coding SEE model Social coding commons follows to assure Sustainable ecosystem evolution. Both quotes are named "Urgent platitutes" by Anold Schrijver, social coder.](https://discuss.coding.social/uploads/default/original/2X/1/17e584ac4ead6821bf8aa1ea6ae74f27e9aeed9c.jpeg) --- _[View the full topic](https://discuss.coding.social/t/sx-sustainable-ecosystem-evolution-see/836)._