Servers on the Fediverse are totally independent of each other, with no centralised infrastructure at all.
-
I see Mastodon.social as the mainland from which to start your journey. Then you island hop (follow lots of different accounts on different servers) discover where you would like to put down roots, and move.
I get that's the theory, but in practice it hasn't worked out like that
Mastodon.social has become an increasing percentage of the Fediverse since it was placed as a "default" server on the official Mastodon app. If mastodon.social keeps growing it will put the network in danger.
I'm guessing new people are reluctant to move once they've signed up, so to protect the network it would be better to have them sign up on other servers?
-
p.s. The Fediverse can only keep being resilient like this as long as we stay spread out on many servers. If we congregate on one server, that puts the network in danger of major outages.
That's one of many reasons why it's a bad idea to sign up on a supergiant server like mastodon.social, and much better to sign up on a different server. You can find lots of good reliable human-curated servers at https://fedi.garden and https://joinmastodon.org/servers
@FediTips 2 things that don't help / is 100% needed on Mastodon:
- Activity by admin on servers to give time / engage / push / develop their ppl.
Not good enough just to provide space & do #caturday pics
(although it's nice, not that mostly or only - real measurable human listening / development)- Accepting imperfection / doubt + using for more forward-thinking #TRUST / #LOVE.
The manual 2-way work of deciding who is really bad - nobody is perfect but more have to work with all levels.
? -
I get that's the theory, but in practice it hasn't worked out like that
Mastodon.social has become an increasing percentage of the Fediverse since it was placed as a "default" server on the official Mastodon app. If mastodon.social keeps growing it will put the network in danger.
I'm guessing new people are reluctant to move once they've signed up, so to protect the network it would be better to have them sign up on other servers?
@FediTips @noondlyt plus many of us Admins have muted or outright blocked mastodon social for the unmoderated spam and harassment that comes from them. Meaning many users there are unlikely to see n ch of the real fediverse, and be stuck with the local timeline.
Their size and brand recognition are the only reason they haven't been completely defederated like truth social or others. -
I get that's the theory, but in practice it hasn't worked out like that
Mastodon.social has become an increasing percentage of the Fediverse since it was placed as a "default" server on the official Mastodon app. If mastodon.social keeps growing it will put the network in danger.
I'm guessing new people are reluctant to move once they've signed up, so to protect the network it would be better to have them sign up on other servers?
The solution is easy but pretty hardcore: Cap new accounts on the largest servers.
-
The solution is easy but pretty hardcore: Cap new accounts on the largest servers.
Yeah. Some of the best-run servers already do this, they deliberately close signups when they feel they are at the limits of what they can moderate and keep sustainable.
-
I get that's the theory, but in practice it hasn't worked out like that
Mastodon.social has become an increasing percentage of the Fediverse since it was placed as a "default" server on the official Mastodon app. If mastodon.social keeps growing it will put the network in danger.
I'm guessing new people are reluctant to move once they've signed up, so to protect the network it would be better to have them sign up on other servers?
@FediTips @noondlyt I joined Mastodon in 2018 and signed up with mastodon.social because there weren't many options. Some instances were only in non-English languages, some had requirements (be in a particularly profession, such as science), or required new users to request permission, or had only single-digit numbers of users and looked like they might not survive. (So far as I know, they didn't.)
Still my primary account, but I added two more, especially after Musk bought Twitter.
-
I get that's the theory, but in practice it hasn't worked out like that
Mastodon.social has become an increasing percentage of the Fediverse since it was placed as a "default" server on the official Mastodon app. If mastodon.social keeps growing it will put the network in danger.
I'm guessing new people are reluctant to move once they've signed up, so to protect the network it would be better to have them sign up on other servers?
In addition I think a lot of users probably see no benefit to moving. As far as they're concerned there's nothing wrong with their experience so moving seems pointless and maybe risky.
-
@FediTips @noondlyt I joined Mastodon in 2018 and signed up with mastodon.social because there weren't many options. Some instances were only in non-English languages, some had requirements (be in a particularly profession, such as science), or required new users to request permission, or had only single-digit numbers of users and looked like they might not survive. (So far as I know, they didn't.)
Still my primary account, but I added two more, especially after Musk bought Twitter.
@Karen5Lund @FediTips @noondlyt
Same, although I don't use the other 2 all that much. I only check mentions and my home timeline. I don't see any offensive stuff at all.
What I like about Mastodon.social is that it's international, multi-lingual, and there's no dominating nationality. A global village.
Also, I see several instances struggle to keep up. Some, successful initially, gave up. Understandably so. Volunteer work should be fun and rewarding, not a fight.
-
@Karen5Lund @FediTips @noondlyt
Same, although I don't use the other 2 all that much. I only check mentions and my home timeline. I don't see any offensive stuff at all.
What I like about Mastodon.social is that it's international, multi-lingual, and there's no dominating nationality. A global village.
Also, I see several instances struggle to keep up. Some, successful initially, gave up. Understandably so. Volunteer work should be fun and rewarding, not a fight.
@RolfBly @Karen5Lund @noondlyt
There are many good well-run instances that have been around for years, here is a small human-curated selection: https://fedi.garden/servers-sorted-by-founding-year
-
@RolfBly @Karen5Lund @noondlyt
There are many good well-run instances that have been around for years, here is a small human-curated selection: https://fedi.garden/servers-sorted-by-founding-year
@FediTips Yeah I know. I mean, I understand your point.
Although I do wonder: I see a lot of people, from the US, speculate that mastodon.social will be taken over and then monetized. I.e. ad-ridden; enshittified.
They seem to believe that anything and everything is for sale if the price is right.
I resent that. I believe some things just aren't, and shouldn't be, for sale.
Likewise, Mastodon.social has made legal arrangements to warrant that.
-
p.s. The Fediverse can only keep being resilient like this as long as we stay spread out on many servers. If we congregate on one server, that puts the network in danger of major outages.
That's one of many reasons why it's a bad idea to sign up on a supergiant server like mastodon.social, and much better to sign up on a different server. You can find lots of good reliable human-curated servers at https://fedi.garden and https://joinmastodon.org/servers
@FediTips I have beef with mastodon.social and this is one of the many reasons. They identify themselves as Mastodon itself, and I don't like that. No, Sir! 🧐
-
@FediTips Yeah I know. I mean, I understand your point.
Although I do wonder: I see a lot of people, from the US, speculate that mastodon.social will be taken over and then monetized. I.e. ad-ridden; enshittified.
They seem to believe that anything and everything is for sale if the price is right.
I resent that. I believe some things just aren't, and shouldn't be, for sale.
Likewise, Mastodon.social has made legal arrangements to warrant that.
@RolfBly @Karen5Lund @noondlyt
I hope I am wrong but there are probably no legal arrangements that can prevent a big tech company taking things over (apart from gov regulations). All that a big tech company has to do is offer money and then gradually make an organisation dependent upon them for their budget. That gives them power over the non-profit.
For example Mozilla is a non-profit free open source company, but it is effectively under the control of Google due to Google's donations
