Mastodon is financed by crowdfunding instead of venture capital not because we don't know that venture capital exists, not because we don't have bills to pay, and not because venture capital isn't willing to give money to new social media platforms. VCs don't want a sustainable business, they want a big exit. Every VC-backed business is on a timer to deliver or die.
@Gargron BlueSky was cool for a minute. Then I saw the venture capital announcement and was like, welp, so much for that. VC capital always has a price. They want their return.
@Gargron if you are willing to convert mastodon project in pure pure pure common law , we could offer opportunity to get all the funds you need to boost mastodon at speed you never expected by pure pure pure common law that permits new high-speed developent
@Gargron so true - I worked at a VC funded startup and they let it go for two years with no interest in us making revenue. I was told by the founder this was common and gives VCs more leverage later. If you've created something good then you'll need more money to stay in business and they get more equity for continued funding because you're desperate. And if you're mediocre you're never going to be a great exit so they cut their losses and move on.
Side note, if you'd like us to help pay our bills for the 5 full-time employees and a number of freelancers we currently have working on developing Mastodon and bringing you new features, and potentially grow the team to do so even faster, there is a number of ways you can do so outlined on this page: https://joinmastodon.org/sponsors
@Gargron I took the next step this morning and started a (small) monthly donation to support Mastodon’s maintenance and development. Hope progressive nonprofits and candidates will devote even a small portion of their comms budgets to invest in this fundamental, small-d democratic work.
I want to quote the section about financial viability for you, to make sure it's clear.
"We want the Fediverse to be financially viable The Fediverse cannot thrive without people building clients or running providers. And to do those things, they need money. Whether that’s advertising supported, or funded by charities and non-profits, or based on paid-for services, or affiliate revenue, we are working to find ways that companies can do well in the Fediverse."
Stop pretending it's about "#crowdfunding", for you. You are expressly working on bringing #advertising to the #Fediverse, and the Mastodon instance that you run.
@katzenberger@Gargron the goal of the Social Web Foundation is not to bring advertising to the Fediverse. That already exists; there are already fediverse-enabled services that use ads, and there are fediverse accounts that use the sponsored hashtag.
SWF want to help grow the Fediverse and improve the experience, including user safety and privacy, for everyone.
Have you thought about starting a competing org that is also working to grow the Fediverse, but doesn't have the faults you see in the Social Web Foundation or Mastodon GmbH?
There's one in Austria but not one in Germany afaik.
Thanks for quoting this in full, I believe it highlights my point better than I could do it myself.
I also believe that you are aware how the #Fediverse is already thriving without your attempts at commercialization, and your hosting of malicious actors like Meta as advisors of your foundation.
Let me know if you have any other questions about my assessment of the #SWF, e.g. of its attempt to increase "safety and privacy" (your words) by embracing the makers of #Facebook.
I would certainly consider starting a competing org if somebody inside those orgs would, let's say, imply that criticism is a form of lèse-majesté, and imply that I should rather shut up and start my own org instead.
Gladly, there seems to be no way this is ever going to happen.
@katzenberger I have a last question to ask, which is: you said that Gargron was trying to bring advertising to the Fediverse, and pointed to the SWF mission page, implying that that's what we're trying to and that by being a supporter, that's what Mastodon wants, also.
I've told you that it's *not* our purpose. Will you keep saying that, regardless? And if so, what would it take for you to believe that it's not the case?
Hence, let me re-quote what you have already quoted, from the web page where your foundation expressly states their "Mission". I'm going to highlight some parts, for your convenience:
»Whether that’s advertising supported, or funded by charities and non-profits, or based on paid-for services, or affiliate revenue, we are working to find ways that companies can do well in the Fediverse.«
I do not even have the number of legs that you obviously seem to be trying to pull here. 🤷♂️
I'd like to see people stewarding a standard abstaining from openly instrumentalizing the standardization process for their own agenda.
But then, I also see people posting things like "I’m going to continue doing the work I’ve done for the W3C and other ActivityPub projects: protocol refinement, documentation, meetings, speaking engagements, reports. But from here, I’ll be doing it with my SWF hat on."
And when people openly say what they are going to do, I believe them.
Which means, essentially, that I neither trust you, nor the foundation, and particularly not the "advisors" that foundation has chosen.
@katzenberger oh, and: I updated our mission page to better reflect what we're working on. Here's the new version of the paragraph that you objected to:
"We want the Fediverse to be sustainable
The Fediverse cannot thrive without those who build and maintain infrastructure like clients or servers, and social infrastructure like moderation. We want the people and organizations who provide those services to have the financial and mental health support they need for the long haul."
@katzenberger We're doing strategic planning right now among the founders, and we've been discussing a change from "financially viable" to "sustainable" for a while, so I just did it. We'll make more changes to the Web site over the next few months, too. Please feel free to let me or the other team members know if there's something on the Web site that is giving you pause.
@Gargron What I want most most most is just the ability to post more than 500 chars at a time. Just make this something customizable by an admin! Pweeeez! I am too verbose for only 500 chars most of the time! 😅
Edit: I'm aware of glitch-soc. I'm on a managed, vanilla-masto instance 😭