6 ms·
That's somewhat what federation solves. You pick out an instance which represents a particular way of moderating. You can still listen in on (most) of the other
by tscs37 9y ago
That's somewhat what federation solves. You pick out an instance which represents a particular way of moderating. You can still listen in on (most) of the other network.
If you don't like the moderation/government of your instance, you pick another.
- gregknicholson 9y agoI like this model, but there's still a bit of unwelcome friction there, at least in Mastodon and Matrix: your identity is tied to your home server. That could be solved by a robust way of confirming that 2 identities are the same person: so all traffic for user@example.horse is also directed to user@example.golf and vice-versa. Coming at the same sort of thing from a distributed approach (I'm thinking of Scuttlebutt): you could make it possible to subscribe to another person's followers and blocklist, delegating your moderation to someone else. I suppose there would soon be well-known and popular options to delegate to, much like popular ad-blocking lists; but still, each person can choose which ones to use.
- tscs37 9y agoIIRC people on mastodon are working on making an identity independent of the home server so you can migrate elsewhere. I don't think subscribing to moderation is particularly useful, I considered such an approach at some point but the approach fragments the network too much (IMO)
- gregknicholson 9y agoScuttlebutt isn't designed to be a single network, so at least there fragmentation is not a problem. See [Against Consensus](https://www.scuttlebutt.nz/principles.html https://www.scuttlebutt.nz/principles.html).
- jsilence 9y agoRed Matrix, a descendant of friendica, not to be confused with matrix, solves this with portable profiles. The account is tied to an instance, but your profile is liberated: https://redmatrix.info/help/accounts_profiles_channels_basics https://redmatrix.info/help/accounts_profiles_channels_basic...
- jonnydubowsky 9y agoChecked out Red Matrix, and it instantly fulfills the worst tendency of alternative decentralized social networks. Centralized social media takes on the moderation in a way that typically leads to the banning of racist and toxic groups and those groups are often the first to set up shop in the censorship resistant alternstives. The very first landing page of Redmatrix takes you to the Aryan Nation Radio community and a bunch of antisemitic and racist content. This is a major turnoff to anyone pursuing alternatives and while I support free speech and think even the worst of humanity should have a home to be terrible with each other, figuring out how to keep this off the home page is probably a good idea to get these alternatives into the adoption phase.
- jsilence 9y agoWow, I did not realize this. Thanks for the 'heads up'. I had a similar experience with ZeroNet where extremist groups swiftly occupied the ground and toxified the budding discussions. So in conclusion, are the idiots keeping us from having a decent solution for a social network?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- teleclimber 9y ago> I like this model, but there's still a bit of unwelcome friction there I remember being really frustrated and annoyed when I tried to sign up for Mastodon. Trying to decide what instance to sign up with by looking at a list of possible instances, where they all look the same, and knowing basically nothing about how Masto even really worked was just stupid. Personally I think the federated model, as it has been implemented, is not a good solution. It just adds complexity and confusion.