That's a Pannie box to open if ever there was one. Thinking about thinking. WTH is that. What does that even mean.

Thinking about the art of thinking, If there is an art in thinking. Some might say there is. Then just because you are thinking, that does not mean what you think is right.

Are you thinking or are you thinking about the things other people have said. When you think, do you think in agreement or in analysis.

Or does it mean something off the scale. Like you are thinking about that you might think later.

For me, thinking is generally about what others have said. Could they mean it. Or are the words cosmetics to hide an alternative goal. In most cases My thinking is selfish. I think on how an integration with another thought might benefit both, on even stronger terms long term.

I hear the things that people say about the changes that would like to be made. I have listened to it for years. The Universal income that would just about kill economies all around the world. A theory that is doomed to failure at the basic economics level.

Now a USfL. Universal Standard for Living. This could be done. That boat has sailed now though. Although it could pull in to port somewhere.

The free thing is always a no. It never has a positive end.

The message behind different projects to change the future for the better is and has been generally in the good interests of the people. With all of those good of the people decisions made, How the hell did we end up here.
By relying on a top heavy system.

People tell me this can be changed, most say it can't. "It has always been that way". No it has not! "It is what it is" Nonsense, it is because you will do nothing to help in changing.

Those who say things can change, do not offer much in the way of how when timescale or other. I gave all that stuff up front and straight away. Variations for different starting points.

Ownership and governance. Those seem to be two topics avoided. Those seem to be the two most important to me to get established. Well that is once something a bit bigger has grown. But the setting up and testing of the system to work can be done at any time. Establishing something before the finance is reached.

I do not want ownership or governance over anything I build or help in building. I would like to control the initial directions and be part in writing a constitution on the roles and duties of positions held within. After that point I would like to concentrate my efforts on my local community. The project can expand and grow in to other listed area's.

The development of local hubs in other area's, supported by what has been built in other local area's. Each hub generated would return a % to the core team. This will generate the ability to begin new hubs requested in other vicinity's.

Governance, now this one is a bit tricky. In general governance will all be done on local levels. The choices made and investment to permitted places. The release of any funding should not all be at a local level. Releasing of funds would go through a tiered process of multi-sign agreement. Hive independent assessments would also be made before releasing any funds.

Any fraudulent behaviours would lead to removal from the benefits of the project or projects a community might be involved in. At the very least. Removal of any persons involved. I am sure the community they stole from would have enough to say.

A decentralised system that could work.
If you can do something and it is not a bad thing. Is it wrong not to do it?
Even if you are not sure if you can or not. is it wrong not to try?

Doing nothing will change nothing.
The better role is trying.