4 ms·
Mastodon itself can't actually remove servers, any more than they can remove someone else's website, because servers are hosted by other people on others' compu
by fennecfoxen 5y ago
Mastodon itself can't actually remove servers, any more than they can remove someone else's website, because servers are hosted by other people on others' computers. Mastodon can lock those servers out of their directories, or out of the main federation-network, though.
- cblconfederate 5y agoyeah , defederation. it would be better to have a protocol that doesnt allow that.
- russdpale 5y agoSo if someone spun a child porn instance, we should all be forced to see that in our federated timeline? Come on, get real.
- cblconfederate 5y agono but it could be up to the receiver address to choose what to block.
- albertgoeswoof 5y agoThat’s literally how it works now
- riffic 5y agoemail works the same way. If I, as the email admin of xyzcorp.biz get too many spammy emails from your domain, you can expect to be blocked / defederated. are we dismissing smtp now as a protocol?
- cblconfederate 5y agoemail servers block by content/address though, not only entire domains
- johnny22 5y agothat's not true at all. I've ran mail servers. It's really easy to block by domain, and I have.
- dada78641 5y agoI think this is the correct way of doing it. Anyone can start their own instance and their own federation. It'd actually be a massive breach of freedom if you were somehow not allowed to shut out servers from your Mastodon federation—kind of like not having the freedom to block someone on Twitter.
- kstrauser 5y agoExactly. Anyone has the freedom to post whatever they want on their own server. I have the freedom not to carry their traffic.
- fomine3 5y agoBlocking each instance is the best way compared to other centered option.