Network
Green-Link wants to offer something quite different from LinkedIn: less performance, less recruitment theatre, less algorithmic noise, and more trust, purpose, and practical collaboration.
LinkedIn is built around status display, self-branding, and an engagement machine that rewards bland confidence and performative productivity. That is not a good basis for serious climate, ecological, and political work.
Green-Link’s network should instead help people find one another around real interests, real capacities, and real needs: policy work, research, local initiatives, practical projects, institutions worth building, and communities that want to move beyond exhausted orthodoxies.
The point would not be to maximise time-on-site or to keep people scrolling. Updates should be opt-in and purposeful. The emphasis should be on projects, working groups, book-linked discussions, and meaningful introductions rather than endless low-grade posting.
For the kinds of communities Green-Link cares about, the key question is not “Who can I impress?” but “Who can I work with, who can I trust, and what can we build together?”
The people Green-Link hopes to connect are often interested in policy and action that are more radical than the mainstream allows, but they are not interested in empty gesture politics. They care about implementation, institutions, and practical pathways as much as critique.
A useful network in this space would help connect thought to doing: researchers to organisers, practitioners to communities, policy thinkers to projects, and people with offers to people with needs.
