# Transparency strategies **URL:** \ **Category:** Sustainable open social systems\ **Tags:** list, strategy\ **Created:** [November 7, 2022, 3:10pm UTC](https://discuss.coding.social/t/transparency-strategies/191 "2022-11-07T15:10:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 6
**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:** [November 18, 2022, 3:52am UTC](https://discuss.coding.social/t/transparency-strategies/191/6 "2022-11-18T03:52:17Z")
Thank you for your feedback, @dachary. As you know you are a great inspiration for me to think about these subjects. In this topic and others I want to delve into the concepts deeper and find a kind of framework that allows more deliberate and conscious approach to how we can operate, and feel comfortable to do so by knowing the rationale of our choices. > [@dachary](#): > > Forgejo is where I can be radically transparent and this is great. Forgefriends too. But Codeberg no: when I choose to enter the Codeberg space I also adhere to their level of transparency. I see this differently. The delibation with Codeberg is part of the Forgejo project, and there were moments in Forgejo activities where things were Eventually Transparent. In other words applying different transparency strategies became a required _part of_ Forgejo project for various reasons (i.e. collaboration with third parties in this example). > [@dachary](#): > > Although information that need to be kept secret in order for a strategy to be effective is a theoretical possibility, I am yet to find a valid example **in the wider context of social coding / Free Software / humane software**. First I’d like to mention that using the word “secrecy” - though maybe technically correct - refers to the opposite extreme of transparency, and has a negative connotation. We may find another way to describe. In the example above Eventual Transparency was chosen because: - **Opportunity** : Honoring Codeberg governance rules is a pre-condition to reaching strategic objective: Forgejo project under umbrella / custodianship of Codeberg who have a great reputation. - **Respect** : Otto, having a preference for adopting Forgejo, could not short-cut the decision-making process he was bound. This process allows all Codeberg members to discuss freely and unrestrained among themselves without fear of public backlash, and then vote democratically on course of action. Another example where Eventual Transparency was chosen, was my idea for [Code Liberation](https://discuss.coding.social/t/code-liberation-freeing-free-software/179) to be a major service provided by Codeberg. Here considerations where: - **Readiness** : There should be time to draft things, until they are sufficiently worked out not to be leading to discussions on things not relevant, or premature opinion-forming by people TL;DR’ing. - **Timing** : Forgejo was in very early stage at the time, with no strategical directions clear, or even knowing anything about value proposition and project direction. In both of these there are more decisions to be made that will affect the nature of the proposal (such as membership of [The Forgers Guild](https://forg.es)). As it ultimately turned out, both these points led to postponing elaboration of the proposal for good reasons. If Codeberg members were already informed this would lead to significant confusion and unnecessary communication overhead. (In this case my insight is that Software Guilds should operate on their strengths that the strategic collaboration of its members provide and make an attractive Offer to codeberg for collaboration, on the condition of Guild membership. I.e. an invitation to join and be stronger together) > [@dachary](#): > > no more than I will discuss them in the subway, which everyone around me listening. Yes, indeed. And this is another insight. In many cases it is just natural to be not radically transparent. If you are with your friends talking in a bar, having a good time, it would be very weird to demand your talks to be publicly registered. And I wonder to which extent this also applies to your personal online social network (see [Strategic Social Networking](https://discuss.coding.social/t/strategic-social-networking/205)), as well as - stretching the idea further - the talks that Codeberg e.V. members have among themselves. --- _[View the full topic](https://discuss.coding.social/t/transparency-strategies/191)._