There are two ways that servers on here can accept new members:
-
There are two ways that servers on here can accept new members:
-Sign-ups where you join instantly
-Sign-ups where the server moderator has to manually approve your membership
Approval sign-ups make moderation much more effective, but some people seem to find them more difficult.
If you are someone who finds approval sign-ups more difficult, could you explain the main thing putting you off?
(By the way, this isn't meant to be judgmental, just want to find out what the main barriers are!
)@FediTips Having to pitch who you are and why you want to use social media is an awkward dynamic, like setting yourself up for judgment or admittance to an "in group", which feels at odds with the idea of social media being a platform that is (within reasonable constraints) open to all. Not knowing the criteria or how long you'll need to wait are issues.
If instances with problems due to open signups stop federating with those with open signups, a balance that works for everyone will emerge.
-
@FediTips Yep that would be it. Specifically having to word it myself and knowing it will be scrutinized by a human. Im not sure how its supposed to deter bad actors either, considering how easily they could lie.
Ok, makes sense! Is there any way this part of the process could be easier?
For example, would it help if the "Why do you want to join?" question made clear that it isn't really being scrutinised, that it's there just to stop spammers? (There's currently no way for mods to customise the question, that's why they don't do this already.)
(By the way, the reason it's used is because when there have been deliberate spam attacks, all of the attackers have been from instant sign-ups.)
-
@FediTips Having to pitch who you are and why you want to use social media is an awkward dynamic, like setting yourself up for judgment or admittance to an "in group", which feels at odds with the idea of social media being a platform that is (within reasonable constraints) open to all. Not knowing the criteria or how long you'll need to wait are issues.
If instances with problems due to open signups stop federating with those with open signups, a balance that works for everyone will emerge.
Okay, thanks for that.
Would it help if the question made clear that they aren't actually wanting an in-depth answer, that the question is there just to deter spammers?
At the moment there's no way to customise the question, but if mods could customise it and make clear that people aren't really being judged on their answers, would that help?
(Spam attacks recently have all been from accounts on instant sign-ups, that's why so many servers don't allow them.)
-
They don't all do this, some have instant signups and others have manually approved.
I'm asking as there were some really nasty trolls who joined recently and it brought up the debate over whether sign-ups should be instant or not.
It would be nice to find out if there are ways to make screened sign-ups easier for people who currently find them difficult
@FediTips @TroikaFox As I mentioned in another comment thread, I don't think restricting signups will be as effective at guarding against these trolls as some have suggested. I think limiting the ability of newly registered users to spam in high volume would be a much better way to fix that problem. We're at risk of choosing the wrong tool for the job, not achieving the goal and having some negative impacts as well along with it.
-
@FediTips @TroikaFox As I mentioned in another comment thread, I don't think restricting signups will be as effective at guarding against these trolls as some have suggested. I think limiting the ability of newly registered users to spam in high volume would be a much better way to fix that problem. We're at risk of choosing the wrong tool for the job, not achieving the goal and having some negative impacts as well along with it.
Just going by recent experience, all of the recent spam/scam attacks were on servers with instant sign-ups. When servers switched to screened sign-ups, the spammers avoided signing up there.
That seems to be the number one reason why so many servers currently use this feature, it seems to work in the real world.
-
Okay, thanks for that.
Would it help if the question made clear that they aren't actually wanting an in-depth answer, that the question is there just to deter spammers?
At the moment there's no way to customise the question, but if mods could customise it and make clear that people aren't really being judged on their answers, would that help?
(Spam attacks recently have all been from accounts on instant sign-ups, that's why so many servers don't allow them.)
@FediTips I think the risk there is it just becomes an elaborate and meaningless captcha, which spammers will circumvent with AI anyway. As I mentioned in a follow-on comment, I think introducing controls that only allow people to start sending comments, dms, other tags and probably follows, as well, gradually over time would be much more effective at limiting the spam problem.
-
@FediTips I think the risk there is it just becomes an elaborate and meaningless captcha, which spammers will circumvent with AI anyway. As I mentioned in a follow-on comment, I think introducing controls that only allow people to start sending comments, dms, other tags and probably follows, as well, gradually over time would be much more effective at limiting the spam problem.
I can see that in theory, but in practice the question seems to be genuinely enough friction to put spammers off?
I don't know any accounts in the recent spam attacks that were on servers with non-instant signups.
-
Okay, thanks for that.
Would it help if the question made clear that they aren't actually wanting an in-depth answer, that the question is there just to deter spammers?
At the moment there's no way to customise the question, but if mods could customise it and make clear that people aren't really being judged on their answers, would that help?
(Spam attacks recently have all been from accounts on instant sign-ups, that's why so many servers don't allow them.)
@FediTips @tokyo_0 Maybe there should be an option in Mastodon to skip the textbox, or let them fill out their profile as an "application " if this is mostly about spam issues. A server could then just have the manual approval.
I agree I feel very awkward in this situation. Having to explain your reason for just wanting to exist is kind of a werid unwelcoming vibe. -
@FediTips It depends on whether it's a big, main instance or a smaller one. If I'm one of hundreds or thousands, it wouldn't bother me, but if it's just a few people, unless I know someone in the instance,I would definitely hesitate. Maybe keep looking for another one. It can be extremely hard, looking at the description of the instance, to figure out if they actually want me to join, or if they're aiming for someone else.
Okay, thanks for feedback!
Would it help if the question was customised to explain exactly what they're asking for and why?
-
There are two ways that servers on here can accept new members:
-Sign-ups where you join instantly
-Sign-ups where the server moderator has to manually approve your membership
Approval sign-ups make moderation much more effective, but some people seem to find them more difficult.
If you are someone who finds approval sign-ups more difficult, could you explain the main thing putting you off?
(By the way, this isn't meant to be judgmental, just want to find out what the main barriers are!
)@FediTips I recently joined, and avoided servers that required approval. I think the reasons were, in order of priority:
- I am used to the general internet where such a process would probably involve disclosure of sensitive data
- I dread having to justify myself and my views to another, particularly a stranger who's views I know nothing about
- I did not have to wait a long time to get accessIf it was clear that all that was expect was the content of my prospective welcome message, mostly to check I am not a bot, and it is usually quick to get approved then I would have been much more likely to consider those servers.
-
@FediTips Often there is no particular requirement to the text that needs to be written, and it's kind of a challenge, you're sittin' there like on a job interview. What do they want from me? I guess, that's the most prominent reason. There are moderators that make it clear: please include a couple phrases about yourself, if you are interested in the topic/language (for topic/language-specific instances), and to fight spam, include this particular word in your text. clear, comprehensive, great. But not everyone is like that.
Okay, thank you for that
So a customised question which made clear why they're asking and what kind of answer they're expecting would be useful?
-
@FediTips @tokyo_0 Maybe there should be an option in Mastodon to skip the textbox, or let them fill out their profile as an "application " if this is mostly about spam issues. A server could then just have the manual approval.
I agree I feel very awkward in this situation. Having to explain your reason for just wanting to exist is kind of a werid unwelcoming vibe.@linkplay @FediTips Spammers will just use AI anyway. It's genuine users who will be deterred.
The kind of malicious trolls I think we're talking about may have used open instances to reduce friction by one step, but I think it's a mistake to think they will just give up and go away if they have to type text in a box. I really think it's the wrong solution to the problem and that other measures like not allowing users to interact so freely immediately after registration would be more effective.
-
@FediTips I recently joined, and avoided servers that required approval. I think the reasons were, in order of priority:
- I am used to the general internet where such a process would probably involve disclosure of sensitive data
- I dread having to justify myself and my views to another, particularly a stranger who's views I know nothing about
- I did not have to wait a long time to get accessIf it was clear that all that was expect was the content of my prospective welcome message, mostly to check I am not a bot, and it is usually quick to get approved then I would have been much more likely to consider those servers.
Okay, thank you so much for that!
So a customised question that made those points clear would make joining easier?
About the waiting time, is the main problem the actual time itself or not knowing how long it was? For example if it said "Most applications approved within 24 hours" would that help?
-
@linkplay @FediTips Spammers will just use AI anyway. It's genuine users who will be deterred.
The kind of malicious trolls I think we're talking about may have used open instances to reduce friction by one step, but I think it's a mistake to think they will just give up and go away if they have to type text in a box. I really think it's the wrong solution to the problem and that other measures like not allowing users to interact so freely immediately after registration would be more effective.
-
I can see that in theory, but in practice the question seems to be genuinely enough friction to put spammers off?
I don't know any accounts in the recent spam attacks that were on servers with non-instant signups.
@FediTips You're not listening.
This is something people don't want and it isn't going to solve the problem.
It's just something one user has latched onto in posts that are popular because they speak out against abuse. Of course abuse is wrong and action is needed, but a knee jerk reaction with a "solution" that's trivially circumvented just makes people feel good about doing something when they haven't actually achieved anything. Genuine users will be discouraged and the abuse will continue.
-
@FediTips I would never join anything with restricted registration. I am never going to put myself under the potential disapproval of some arbitrary dictator. It raises the hackles. How dare you judge me?
This is the thing though, most of the time the moderators aren't really bothered about what people actually write. I've joined servers where I just said "I am interested in (topic of server)" and it was quickly approved.
Would it help if the question made this clear?
The main reason a lot of servers have this question is just because it seems to work against spam attacks. All the spam attackers from the recent mass spam waves joined servers with instant signups.
-
There are two ways that servers on here can accept new members:
-Sign-ups where you join instantly
-Sign-ups where the server moderator has to manually approve your membership
Approval sign-ups make moderation much more effective, but some people seem to find them more difficult.
If you are someone who finds approval sign-ups more difficult, could you explain the main thing putting you off?
(By the way, this isn't meant to be judgmental, just want to find out what the main barriers are!
)@FediTips I just think we shouldn't build walled gardens. I had a bad experience with other platforms in the past where you have to "apply" to join, and those in charge found an opportunity to gatekeep.
There are some notable exceptions, but for the most part I won't join an online community where I have to "apply". That's how I ended up on the default server.
-
@FediTips You're not listening.
This is something people don't want and it isn't going to solve the problem.
It's just something one user has latched onto in posts that are popular because they speak out against abuse. Of course abuse is wrong and action is needed, but a knee jerk reaction with a "solution" that's trivially circumvented just makes people feel good about doing something when they haven't actually achieved anything. Genuine users will be discouraged and the abuse will continue.
A couple of things have happened in the recent spam attacks:
-The spammers are all on instant signup accounts.
-When servers which previously had spam signups switch off instant signups, they stop getting spam signups.
Given these two things, it's surely clear why admins use this tool?
I understand the concern about how it could be circumvented, but it doesn't seem actually to be happening?
-
@FediTips I just think we shouldn't build walled gardens. I had a bad experience with other platforms in the past where you have to "apply" to join, and those in charge found an opportunity to gatekeep.
There are some notable exceptions, but for the most part I won't join an online community where I have to "apply". That's how I ended up on the default server.
This is the thing though, most of the time mods aren't actually trying to screen the kind of person who joins, they just want to put spammers off joining. (Spam attacks recently have all come from instant signup servers.)
If the question about why you want to join made this clear, would it help?
For example when I've joined a server and written "I am interesting in (topic of server)" that has been enough and I got approved quickly.
-
Just going by recent experience, all of the recent spam/scam attacks were on servers with instant sign-ups. When servers switched to screened sign-ups, the spammers avoided signing up there.
That seems to be the number one reason why so many servers currently use this feature, it seems to work in the real world.
@FediTips @tokyo_0 @TroikaFox
Hey thanks for asking these questions and gathering feedback. I'd just like to humbly try and make sure we're not operating on a bad assumption here -When servers added moderated signups, the spammers stopped signing up on those servers - that is clear. However, if ALL servers moderated signups, would the spammers give up? Or would they adapt to the moderated signups (say, with an AI LLM) and continue spamming?
It is possible that they only stopped signing up on servers that added signup moderation because other open-signup servers were easily available. If that were no longer true, and if the spammers adapted and continued to sign up, then requiring moderated signups adds a barrier only for non-spammers, which seems counterproductive.
