Eric S. Raymond wrote that the internet should prioritize the needs and experiences of end users over bureaucratic control [1].

This perspective challenges the current trajectory of internet governance. By advocating for a shift away from centralized management, Raymond suggests that the web's ability to foster innovation depends on maintaining its decentralized roots.

In a post published Oct. 13, 2020 [1], Raymond said that the success of the internet is rooted in its user-driven nature. He said that attempts to centrally control the network will inevitably limit access and stifle the growth of new technologies.

"The internet is for end users," Raymond wrote in his post [1].

He contrasted two different philosophies of network management. He said that the industry needs to stop trying to manage the internet like a highway and start thinking of it as a town square [1]. This distinction emphasizes a move from a controlled utility model to a more open, communal space.

Raymond also addressed the role of intermediaries in the digital ecosystem. He said that the problem is not a surplus of users, but rather an excess of gatekeepers [1]. According to Raymond, technical solutions should be prioritized over administrative mandates to ensure the network remains open.

While the ideas have circulated in tech communities, a Hacker News article discussing the topic received six points on the Y Combinator platform [2]. This reflects the ongoing debate among developers and architects regarding the balance between stability and openness.

Raymond's thesis remains that the internet's primary value is derived from the autonomy of the people who use it. He said that removing barriers created by administrative entities is the only way to preserve the original spirit of the web [1].

“"The internet is for end users,"”

The tension between centralized regulation and decentralized innovation is a core conflict in modern tech policy. Raymond's argument suggests that treating the internet as a regulated utility—similar to a highway—risks destroying the organic, permissionless innovation that allowed the web to scale. If gatekeepers continue to multiply, the technical architecture of the internet may shift from a public commons to a series of walled gardens.