Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Sunday, 25-Feb-2024 12:20:37 JST Evan Prodromou

   A lot of good conversation here. I find that questions including "should be able" are hard. I use it like, "People should be able to marry those they love," as in, our systems should let people do these things, and if they don't, there's something wrong with the systems and they need to be changed.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Sunday, 25-Feb-2024 12:23:39 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     But many of the replies shift the focus, and blame, to individuals, in the way that you'd say "People should be able to control their temper." There's a lot of talk about backups and upgrades and moderation and so forth, and whether individuals are up to the job.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Sunday, 25-Feb-2024 12:26:54 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     Anyway, I'm strongly agree. I don't want a fediverse with only commercial or institutional account servers. I think we need to avoid legal, technical, social and practical barriers to running a server for your household. I will continue to run a server for my family.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Sunday, 25-Feb-2024 13:13:29 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Dave Neary

     @dneary I feel like "allowed to" leaves out technical or architectural obstacles, but otherwise agree

   • Embed this notice
     Dave Neary (dneary@mathstodon.xyz)'s status on Sunday, 25-Feb-2024 13:13:30 JST Dave Neary

     in reply to

     @evan I definitely made the distinction between "should be allowed to" and "should be able to". But I voted as if the question was the former.

   • Embed this notice
     Evan Prodromou (evan@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 26-Feb-2024 03:34:06 JST Evan Prodromou

     in reply to

     • Archnemysis
     • Johanna, CanCon variant

     @johannab @Archnemysis another option is that some of the manual processes we have now, like upgrades and blocklist management, could be automated, and those who want a bespoke manual server management experience could opt out.

   • Embed this notice
     Archnemysis (archnemysis@mastodon.social)'s status on Monday, 26-Feb-2024 03:34:07 JST Archnemysis

     in reply to

     @evan this is precisely how I took the poll and why I voted strongly agree. Honestly, I’m a bit shocked in the sentiment that it should not be built for individuals to host and maintain their own servers.

   • Embed this notice
     Johanna, CanCon variant (johannab@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 26-Feb-2024 03:34:07 JST Johanna, CanCon variant

     in reply to

     • Archnemysis

     @Archnemysis @evan

     SOME of that sentiment, at least in the past week or so, is coming from the finding that poorly managed AP servers are vulnerable to abuse and create problems for the broader network.

     Mastodon is scrambling to mitigate some of that. but there are a lot of “friends and family” servers out there that need more support than just Dad or Aunt Liz are able to put in.

     Unfortunately most folks are not careful enough in expressing their reasoned objections and just seem hostile.

   • Embed this notice
     Johanna, CanCon variant (johannab@cosocial.ca)'s status on Monday, 26-Feb-2024 03:52:59 JST Johanna, CanCon variant

     in reply to

     • Archnemysis

     @evan @Archnemysis Oh, definitely.

     I really want to emphasize, to truly have the ability for everyone to run their Friends&Family instance, and actually have enough reach to even participate in federation, they need better support (tools and education) to be available.

     I hope I didn’t seem to be excusing the bad attitude some small instances get thrown at them, but I really do think it is mishapprehension and misattribution of where the problem really lies.