The web does not care about deliverables


NOTE: This post is about the Web (not WebXR for a change)


Many people (including corporations) criticize the web as being too messy, therefore it supposedly needs moderation.
I would like to counter this narrative with a the following question:

Why should messy become organised? If so, when would that 'organisation' be complete?

Yes the web is messy, it has a HUGE userbase, it has its heroes, villains, carnivores, vegans etc.
In a sense, it's a very diverse, open and infinite ecosystem, comparable to a forest.
If we organise this forest, would it still be a forest?

Also, could moderation break the whole ecology apart? What about messy-by-design?

Ignoring all this, might expose an interesting cognitive dissonance, which I call 'deliverableism':

"Expecting the organized from the messy"

Take these (false imho) narratives:

* "BigTech controls the web because somebody has to protect the people" * "Power to the people, lets save the web from BigTech using IPFS and blockchain!"

Both represent deliverableism, by sharing the following similarities:

* it inherits the XY problem, by fixating on a certain NEW solution.
* solutions are built using byproducts of the problem (*)
* the moderation HAS to happen by the software (not the individual moderating its own behaviour)
* in many cases the premise is vague & infinite, like "the internet is broken", "the web is unsafe", "companies cannot be trusted", "protect the children" e.g.
* promoting inclusiveness but at the same time excluding important ecological aspects (banning bigtech, people moderating themselves e.g.)


* = For example: starting a Facebook Ad campaign against Facebook; Developers creating an alternative 'better web' accessible thru the 'broken web'. e.g.

When funds are allocated to the solution, the XY problem gets buried in the solution.
For example, halfway a deliverablist-project, it would be taboo to ask:

Q: "Why/when could our solution cause more harm to the initial problem?"
Q: "When would it be better to turn this project into researchproject"
Q: "Based on what we learned, how could our problem/solution be false?"

In deliverableism there's a taboo on adressing the XY problem, once the project started. Calling this corporatism would be a misstake, as governments and companies are free to define morphable deliverables.

Ideas: morphability

Deliverableism is not always bad (food-delivery), it just seems incompatible with complex problems, and enforces deliverable-is-success black/white-thinking. Therefore, for solving complex problems:

* in project-proposals, promote morphable deliverables * re-evaluate the XY problem in every phase of a project
* measure success based on morphability & retrospects during the problem
* realize that the analysis-phase is usually based on imperfect understanding (which improves during the project)