There are two ways that servers on here can accept new members:
-
I don't like feeling like it's a gated community.
It gives me gross.
I completely understand kicking out spambots and bad actors, but I want to be able to look around and explore right away. Not wait and see if I get approved without any idea of how long it might take.
On the internet, even a day is too long and I'll go find something else.
There have been a number of platforms in the past where you couldn't join without an invite. No thanks. Exclusive clubs are not my jam.
@lucyruthe Does this happen often? I've never yet run into a mastodon instance that I couldn't explore.
-
@lucyruthe Does this happen often? I've never yet run into a mastodon instance that I couldn't explore.
Could you explore it _before_ you created an account? If so, that should be a landing page for us new guys.
I felt like I had to sign up somewhere before I knew how anything worked.
Not sure what you mean about "often." You only sign up at the beginning.
-
@lucyruthe Absolutely. When I go to a instance's website, I can see their feed as well as read their various policies.
This is what I see when I go to your instance, and then what I see if I click on "live feeds." And I can scroll down and see more.
I'm a mod at another instance and I often go look at instances when there's been a report, to see if the place overall is shady.
-
@lucyruthe Absolutely. When I go to a instance's website, I can see their feed as well as read their various policies.
This is what I see when I go to your instance, and then what I see if I click on "live feeds." And I can scroll down and see more.
I'm a mod at another instance and I often go look at instances when there's been a report, to see if the place overall is shady.
Yeah, you can browse the public contents of any server that has its public timeline open (which most of them do, because it only shows public posts so there isn't any privacy compromise).
-
Being up front about community standards and what would give someone the boot would make a big difference. Then I could make an educated decision about whether that works for me.
But I'll be honest, just waiting to see if I'm approved by someone else already feels culturally loaded in an awkward way. Reminds me of lots of ways I've had a bad time.
It should be showing you the rules on the website, for example here are the rules on my server: https://social.growyourown.services/about
You don't need to be a member to see the rules on other servers
-
@lucyruthe Absolutely. When I go to a instance's website, I can see their feed as well as read their various policies.
This is what I see when I go to your instance, and then what I see if I click on "live feeds." And I can scroll down and see more.
I'm a mod at another instance and I often go look at instances when there's been a report, to see if the place overall is shady.
Okay you guys, but this is what I found a year ago when I first joined up:
https://joinmastodon.org/And this is what the pick a server button led to:
https://joinmastodon.org/serversIf I was supposed to know how to dig deeper to find the information you are now talking about, I didn't even know where to look.
For real, it feels like you need to sign up before you know how to research the options.
-
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!
)The usually very open ended single question. Like what do they specifically want to know?
-
Okay you guys, but this is what I found a year ago when I first joined up:
https://joinmastodon.org/And this is what the pick a server button led to:
https://joinmastodon.org/serversIf I was supposed to know how to dig deeper to find the information you are now talking about, I didn't even know where to look.
For real, it feels like you need to sign up before you know how to research the options.
@lucyruthe Ah, I see. That is definitely an onboarding issue that needs to be addressed.
-
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 Out of curiosity, in the sign up process is there a way to split the difference where registrations are manually reviewed, but the "write a bit about yourself" blurb can be removed?
I see the current issue being that the platform apparently lacks the tooling to automatically filter account creation using obvious hate speech, and bad actors are abusing open registrations. Until we have automated solutions for that, manual review becomes more necessary. But most users likely find an application essay for account creation an unusual, if not impassible hurdle.
Can the process be tweaked so it's clear the application will be reviewed (hopefully in a timely manner), without having the user provide a justification?
-
@FediTips Out of curiosity, in the sign up process is there a way to split the difference where registrations are manually reviewed, but the "write a bit about yourself" blurb can be removed?
I see the current issue being that the platform apparently lacks the tooling to automatically filter account creation using obvious hate speech, and bad actors are abusing open registrations. Until we have automated solutions for that, manual review becomes more necessary. But most users likely find an application essay for account creation an unusual, if not impassible hurdle.
Can the process be tweaked so it's clear the application will be reviewed (hopefully in a timely manner), without having the user provide a justification?
Yes, the admin can set it so that there's no question but the application has to be manually approved (sort of the same way follow requests work for users following users).
That's a good point, I'm not sure how this affects spammers, but it would prevent people signing up with nasty usernames etc.
-
Okay you guys, but this is what I found a year ago when I first joined up:
https://joinmastodon.org/And this is what the pick a server button led to:
https://joinmastodon.org/serversIf I was supposed to know how to dig deeper to find the information you are now talking about, I didn't even know where to look.
For real, it feels like you need to sign up before you know how to research the options.
Ahh yeah, the JoinMastodon website is not great for this at all. That is a really excellent point! For some reason they just link to the signup pages and don't make clear how to see the main website front pages.
That's why on the https://fedi.garden website I do link to the servers' websites' front pages, so you can see all their info directly.
-
The usually very open ended single question. Like what do they specifically want to know?
This is the problem, the mods want to write a more specific question but the software won't let them. Mastodon has hardcoded the question to just be "Why do you want to sign up?"
I'm trying to gather evidence to convince the software developers that the question needs to be customised by the admins
-
@lucyruthe Ah, I see. That is definitely an onboarding issue that needs to be addressed.
Indeed, this is a serious problem, it's great that Manda raised it.
I have reported this by opening an issue at https://github.com/mastodon/joinmastodon/issues/1051
-
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
seriously i can't imagine how "why do you want to join" will stop spammers... as already said lying is easy. And also a plausibility check is hard.How to check if it's true when i say "i want to be on social media and this instance seemed best for me"?
-
You don't have to imagine it, this is what is actually happening.
All the spam attacks on here (at least that I know about) have come from accounts on instant signup servers.
-
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’d say the approval flow is just bad UX all around.
It’s not about users being lazy or entitled. The experience breaks momentum.
You’ve just discovered something new, you’re curious, you want to join, and suddenly you’re being asked to write a little essay for strangers. You don’t even know what kind of community it is yet or what they expect from you. Then you hit submit and the whole thing goes quiet. I don’t hate moderation, it's the uncertainty.
For new users I think it’s even worse.
They’ve already had to pick a random server from a bunch of names that make no sense, read a page of rules that assume they already understand federation, and then they’re told to justify why they want to join it.
That’s a huge ask for someone still trying to figure out what Mastodon even is. It’s the same reason UX study's shows steep drop-offs with multi-step forms and unclear feedback. Users don’t finish what they don’t understand, and they don’t wait when they don’t know how long the wait is.
The design makes them feel like outsiders before they’ve even walked in the door. IMO I think a trial period would be a much better middle ground.
I opened a feature request about this exact issue yesterday that I think would solve the issues.
-
You don't have to imagine it, this is what is actually happening.
All the spam attacks on here (at least that I know about) have come from accounts on instant signup servers.
that's likely not because of the missing "why..." question but because of the manual aporoval in general.
thats two different things.
or can you explain how a human will see the difference between me or a bot writing "because i like your instance" into that field?
would be interesting to understand what rules people doing these manual approvals go by... well, sadly publishing them allows malicious people to circumvent them
-
that's likely not because of the missing "why..." question but because of the manual aporoval in general.
thats two different things.
or can you explain how a human will see the difference between me or a bot writing "because i like your instance" into that field?
would be interesting to understand what rules people doing these manual approvals go by... well, sadly publishing them allows malicious people to circumvent them
It's an interesting point, would be worth testing to see if the approval alone works
I don't think it's about being able to tell though? I think it's just about the extra friction of spam software having to cope with posting a reason. They may be very casual spammers with a simple script that they don't want to bother changing or fitting LLMs/AI features to.
-
@FediTips I’d say the approval flow is just bad UX all around.
It’s not about users being lazy or entitled. The experience breaks momentum.
You’ve just discovered something new, you’re curious, you want to join, and suddenly you’re being asked to write a little essay for strangers. You don’t even know what kind of community it is yet or what they expect from you. Then you hit submit and the whole thing goes quiet. I don’t hate moderation, it's the uncertainty.
For new users I think it’s even worse.
They’ve already had to pick a random server from a bunch of names that make no sense, read a page of rules that assume they already understand federation, and then they’re told to justify why they want to join it.
That’s a huge ask for someone still trying to figure out what Mastodon even is. It’s the same reason UX study's shows steep drop-offs with multi-step forms and unclear feedback. Users don’t finish what they don’t understand, and they don’t wait when they don’t know how long the wait is.
The design makes them feel like outsiders before they’ve even walked in the door. IMO I think a trial period would be a much better middle ground.
I opened a feature request about this exact issue yesterday that I think would solve the issues.
Thank you so much for taking time to write this, it's getting across well the experience someone would face if they've got no prior knowledge.
-
This is the problem, the mods want to write a more specific question but the software won't let them. Mastodon has hardcoded the question to just be "Why do you want to sign up?"
I'm trying to gather evidence to convince the software developers that the question needs to be customised by the admins
@FediTips I have been trying to change my sign up message for the longest time. And it never has. And cant get anyone to comment on it. Why have it there if it wont change.
Now I'm pretty made to know I've been busting my chops on a wall not meant to move. Instead of thinking I was hitting a glitch. Ugh.
Thanks for mentioning this.
