Look, the "don't panic" vibe here is a big deal, and sometimes that's fine. Often it is thought-policing, which is super NOT.
I tend to step back and think when there is controversy instead of reacting, though I have my moments.
But let me just say that my suspicion that it's going to eventually become necessary for many of us to block mastodon.social and hope that most of our friends and favorites are only using it as a jumping off point before they find (soon) greener, smaller pastures is growing VERY quickly.
And I swear to God that anyone who mansplains to me the obvious problem with what I just said will get blocked, even if I like you.
I am just telling you that that is the increasingly foul scent I catch in the wind - a megaserver that is poorly moderated/cannot be moderated combined with advisors from the worst of social media is a ripe environment for the worst things.
If .social were a time-limited entry point you have to migrate off of, it wouldn't stop the bad behaviour, but it wouldn't make it any harder than it is now, and the network would be better balanced. It'd also, more altruisticly, perhaps cut down on their costs. But I still don't know how you deal with this massive behemoth that is becoming an increasingly large issue/threat without seriously discussing using the banhammer.
It's going to be ugly.
If you are on .social, I really encourage you to look for a smaller instance, or if you are just a bit technically inclined, run an instance yourself! (It isn't that difficult, though the instructions could use some love)
It'll dilute the single-point-of-failure problem, and ensure you are still connected if folks start blocking .social at some point in the future.
I have no actual plans to, but well, I have a tendency to get out just before things get bad, and my Spidey Sense is atingle.
Add comment