Mastodon Migration
Clarification
You do not have to worry about your mastodon.social (m.s) account being defederated.
There is a well meaning, but misleading post currently promoted that suggests you should move your m.s account because:
1) "Instance admins are considering defederating them"
2) "Their admin is making spam accounts easier to create."
Very few, if any, instances are considering blocking m.s, and the recent spam attacks are worthy of sober discussion, not hyperbole. [more]
FediTips has moved!
It's not a scare tactic.
Blocking mastodon.social is now seriously on the cards for many admins, even ones who would never have done it before.
The reason the Fediverse exists is to be decenralised. M.s is way too large now, and getting even larger due to the official app's new onboarding.
If people want this place to be decentralised, they need to move off mastodon.social. If they don't care, then they can expect more fediblocks as m.s grows.
Mastodon Migration
@daniel @feditips Regarding the "not at risk" statement. People on mastodon.social are simply not at risk of being permanently fediblocked isolated from large parts of the Fediverse. They simply are not, and to suggest they are is a scare tactic.
Mastodon Migration
@daniel As discussed above, the issue here is not whether some instances temporarily blocked mastodon.social while the attack was going on. The implication was that people on mastodon.social were at risk for being "defederated" and that they should change instances to avoid this. This was a misleading because peoples accounts on mastodon.social are not at risk of being isolated.
1/
Daniel
@mastodonmigration@mastodon.online I just don't understand where this certainty of your statement comes from or what your intention is. "They will not...", "They're not at risk...".
There are definitely considerations by admins to defederate mastodon.social if it reaches a certain user share: https://mstdn.social/@feditips/110260432218416976
And I'm pretty sure I've also seen statements by bigger instances with a couple thousand of users that back this decision (unfortunately the search isn't really good enough to find those posts atm).
The question is also whether the temporary blockings of mastodon.social will at some point become very many temporary blockings which are then actually more or less permanent. The moderation of mastodon.social will definitely suffer as the number of users increases (even if you leave out spam accounts and attacks like yesterday). The other issues were mentioned in the post by @feditips@mstdn.social .
If the users can do it and are confident enough, they should definitely register on other instances. If only for the reason of load distribution and to keep the #Fediverse alive and a nice and friendly place.
Btw some of the other fediverse software uses captchas to prevent bot accounts.
Daniel
@mastodonmigration@mastodon.online If you read through #mastoadmin posts after the recent spam wave, some admins definitely blocked or silenced mastodon.social. Some temporary, some longer.
Tim Stanton
@feditips Does this concern apply to mstdn.social as well? Thanks.
FediTips has moved!
The whole point of this place is to spread the network out:
https://fedi.tips/why-is-the-fediverse-on-so-many-separate-servers/
If the growth of m.s is a threat to this, then that growth needs to be stopped.
Ideally, the owners of m.s would stop taking signups, or at least remove it from the official app. But they're doing exactly the opposite, they're telling everyone to sign up on m.s.
M.s are destroying the driving force of the Fediverse by doing this, m.s need to stop.
FediTips has moved!
No.
Mstdn.social is a totally different server owned by totally different people. It has no connection whatsoever to mastodon.social.
Tim Stanton
@feditips Thank you so much for your fast and thoughtful response!!
FediTips has moved!
I run a project called fedi.garden which lists safe servers that aren't m.s:
Going to m.s is not a safer option, it has worse moderation as there are fewer staff per member.
Jo-chin up, elbows up.
@feditips You need to just slow down, be less threatening. We just got here, based on the hype, & are just getting over the discombobulation & trauma of parting one (or more) platforms of friends, trying to find new people, learn a new system, & within weeks you want us to 'jump' again. Or you threaten blocks. I do not have the spoons to spend time trying to find a 'safe' one. How do I know? What is safe one day, may not be next. These are growing pains give us time to figure stuff out here.
Jo-chin up, elbows up.
@feditips I saw that page yesterday, and while it's great to have all this, it is also unhelpful for a quick move or assessment. It is too many options that is overwhelming for many. It tells me very little about the metrics of what you call safety, it cannot guarantee it won't get overwhelmed either, when everyone leaves m.s it will only make the other instances unwieldy targets too.
FediTips has moved!
What safety metrics do you want?
If you don't want options, choose from the general list.
Jo-chin up, elbows up.
@feditips It is in the interest of all admins on all instances to ensure all the instances run well and get a chance to work through growing pains.
FediTips has moved!
The growing pains will be fatal if a majority of users go to one server.
The reason this place exists is that the network is spread out. When that stops happening, then there is nothing protecting this place any more.
We are trying to protect this place, which has been built up through years of effort by volunteers.
cmonster
@feditips honest question from a non-techie who came here when Twitter was first purchased but not from Twitter: Would it be feasible for new sign ups to be offered the option to be automatically put on a random instance to start? Of course the instances on that list would choose to opt in to it and new users could choose to DIY if they desired. But from my perspective as a still newbie, what instance I ended up on mattered very little as a casual user with no specific focus. I think most people are like me.
I get that the wealth of servers protects the system as a whole from takeover etc and that's great. But asking new users to care what instance they are on and evaluate them from the get go is a big hurdle. It's hard to grok why the choice even matters when one first signs up. So sign new users up to a random one by default to spread everyone around, but give them the option to choose too. Could that work?
FediTips has moved!
Yes, a random server from a trusted pool with good track records is exactly what people are suggesting should happen.
Jerry on Mastodon
@feditips @mastodonmigration @daniel
Why a block? Why not limit or silence if one wants to take action? At least until there are moderator tools to help avoid these attacks?
Blocking sounds extreme to me.
Blocking might cause a large exit from the Fediverse if people feel they are being made pawns in some sort of internal uprising.
I'd be pissed if suddenly I lost all my connections to people I communicate with on mastodon.social. I'd think, "who the hell are these people to decide that I can't talk to my friends any longer or follow people who I like to follow."
I'd leave permanently. I would never trust another server Admin. I'd never come back.
Convince me that I'm wrong.
FediTips has moved!
@Jerry @mastodonmigration @daniel
"I'd be pissed if suddenly I lost all my connections to people I communicate with on mastodon.social. "
It's not goint to be painless, but it will be a lot easier than if m.s becomes a majority of the Fediverse.
If that happens, the Fedi itself could be bought and sold on the whim of the owner of m.s (which at the moment is Eugen but who knows who it will be in the future).
It's like global warming: the longer you wait, the harder it is to take action.
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.