Yancey’s concept of [Post-Individualism](https://darkforest.metalabel.com/postindividual) resonates with me but I’m skeptical about the idea of building a network around it. When I hear Post-Individual, I think multiplayer, but I haven’t quite done the work to etch out the nuances. In many ways this idea of squad wealth, co-imagining, seems altruistic, balancing personal prosperity with that of a larger group. I felt this energy most when participating in Public Assembly, but eventually felt concerned when fewer and fewer people were placing energy towards pushing the collective forward. Perhaps this is because of a misalignment in incentives. However, isn’t this always bound to happen? How do squads or labels differ from open source projects, or companies where the founders or original contributors who create the initial momentum stop steering the ship? What does a post-individual platform look like? What if you could only start a channel with two people? Some criteria requiring two signatures for creating an instance of a channel. From there you can participate collectively, grow it how you choose. What about River gives organizations trust that they should build on it? Is this the level of sufficient decentralization that we need? River should enable groups to build networks that enable them to reach and own their audience. Think: [Metalabel](https://www.metalabel.com/) [Lucidhaus](https://lucid.haus/) [Public Assembly](https://www.public---assembly.com/) Simultaneously, River should enable individuals to create platforms that enable them to build networks. What do these groups want to do? What is the propeller for organizations, how do you enable that to grow?