That is why we are building W. That is also why some special interest don't want us to succeed.

Instead of bombing data centres to disrupt bots. We should stop them entering our public debate in the first place. Europe needs to take information warfare seriously. Owning and controlling our own European platforms, where posting requires human verification, is one important part of that defence

We cannot afford another ten years to recognise what is happening today. Reports of a sharp drop in bot traffic from Yandex’s network after Ukraine struck Russian data centres point to a simple conclusion:

In my view, Brexit was one of the first major victories in the campaign to divide Europe. That does not mean Russia alone caused the result. Information warfare exploits existing frustrations and divisions. It does not need to invent them.

Ten years after Brexit, a British prime minister publicly acknowledges Russian interference. For anyone following the ongoing information warfare, the warning signs were there from the beginning. Why did it take so long?

We are living through the final chapter of the oil era. Will those fighting to keep it alive take us all down with them? Or can we phase out fossil fuels before it’s too late? If we want a liveable future, we must all fight for it.

Why are you anonymous, and why use a name that mimics We Don’t Have Time?

According to Cloudflare Data Explorer, Russian bot traffic dropped to 49% after Ukraine struck a Yandex data centre.

Criticism and scrutiny are welcome. But why so much hostility? Why assume the worst about our motives? I honestly don’t understand. If we share the goal of better social media, let’s talk about how to get there.

We are building a European alternative to US Big Tech. If the goal is a healthier, more transparent social media environment, shouldn’t we have some common ground? Why put so much energy into undermining W? If you don't like out approach you can simply chose not to use it.

Someone has created a site called “W Don’t Have Time” to mock us, republishing public information from W Social. If nobody is paying for this, I still don’t understand the motivation. What are they trying to achieve?

Of course people act on principle without being paid. But asking who is behind an effort, who funds them, and what other financial interests they have is a reasonable question. Why remain anonymous while demanding transparency from us?

“Get rich quick”? I’ve spent the past ten years working on climate action. You can disagree with me, but that is a very unfair description of my motivation.

I understand perfectly well. My questions concern the people behind the flood of content about W since we launched our beta in June. Who are they? Who funds them? What other financial interests might they have? And why is the site anonymous? Those are reasonable questions about transparency.

This is good.

Can you add these details to your site? You seem to have put considerable time and resources into creating a website about W. It would help readers to know who is behind it. Here are my details: Lars Ingmar Stensson Rentzhog 45–49 Swedish Who is behind you, and who is funding the site?

I can confirm. We will NOT livestream it on W.