Mastodon.social's continued growth as a percentage of the Fedi is (IMHO) worrying, I did a thread about this: social.chinwag.org/@FediThing/…
M.s is currently 28.7% of all active Fedi accounts and rising. For whatever it's worth, if m.s reaches these network percentages I'm going to take following actions:
Mastodon.social's continued growth as a percentage of the Fedi is (IMHO) worrying, I did a thread about this: social.chinwag.org/@FediThing/…
M.s is currently 28.7% of all active Fedi accounts and rising. For whatever it's worth, if m.s reaches these network percentages I'm going to take following actions:
We need to talk about Mastodon gGmbH. They are the main developers of Mastodon's server software & official mobile apps, they own mastodon.social and Mastodon's trademarks. Their behaviour is inexplicably going in two totally opposite directions.
A couple of years ago they started promoting mastodon.social from the official apps while hiding other servers, causing their server to grow while other servers shrank. Mastodon.social is currently about 28.7% of the active Fediverse and growing.
For comparison, another major server mas.to is just 1.2% of the active Fediverse. Mastodon.social is about twenty-four times bigger.
It's not a personal attack on users, I just don't want to be giving up most of my spare time to help someone build a centralised social network they control. It feels pointless, it would be like doing free tech support for Twitter.
I run my accounts and sites to help build a decentralised network that no one controls.
My extra frustration with the big blue button is their response if ~"we don't direct anyone to sign up with just us". It's either deliberate or indicative of a complete lack of understanding... neither which should be the server new people are being pointed at.
I'm not bashing m.s, I'm bashing Mastodon gGmbH promoting an instance that is about to take over the entire network when the network is supposed to be decentralised.
There are plenty of nice instances with better community moderation which I promote every day at @FediGarden and list at fedi.garden but it's hard to get new people to know about them because Mastodon gGmbH won't mention anyone but their own server on the front page of their trademarked app.
We need to talk about Mastodon gGmbH. They are the main developers of Mastodon's server software & official mobile apps, they own mastodon.social and Mastodon's trademarks. Their behaviour is inexplicably going in two totally opposite directions.
A couple of years ago they started promoting mastodon.social from the official apps while hiding other servers, causing their server to grow while other servers shrank. Mastodon.social is currently about 28.7% of the active Fediverse and growing.
For comparison, another major server mas.to is just 1.2% of the active Fediverse. Mastodon.social is about twenty-four times bigger.
I'd suggest announcing to followers on M.s. a plan to defederate in (say)12 months time if the Fediverse is more centralised than it was at the time you announced the plan.
Works on a clearly understandable timeframe and makes anyone blaming you look absurd since you're just sticking to your ideals and doing exactly what you announced when you said you would.
Plus, if anyone is really angry, yet didn't decide it'd be worth moving instance when they'd a whole year, they're no loss.
yes, I understand the risks of centralization. Have any of them materialized on mastodon.social?
My major concerns with traditional social media boil down to 1) opaque, proprietary algorithm, and 2) corporate ownership = profit motive = surveillance ad economy.
So far as I know, mastodon.social passes both items for the time being. If they fail at some point in the future, I will move posthaste.
"My major concerns with traditional social media boil down to 1) opaque, proprietary algorithm, and 2) corporate ownership = profit motive = surveillance ad economy. "
All of those are far, far easier to do on centralised networks.
yes, fully understood. It’ll just be trivially easy to ditch mastodon.social and port somewhere else if they go to the dark side as compared to any other service.
If they go to the dark side with most people on there, they could just switch off federation.
I'm also concerned about what happens to the server software development if most people are on one instance that they control. They might decide to de-prioritise federation features because they are technically the most difficult and time-consuming, and if everyone's on one instance federation might start to be seen as a side-issue.
I am giving most of my spare time to running accounts and websites helping people use the Fediverse.
I do this because I want to help build a social network owned by the grassroots, because I think this is important for society.
I'm not going to give my free time just to build a network that is controlled by one person or one organisation. It would be pointless, it would just be another Twitter.
Good luck with your maximalist crusade then. As I mentioned, power laws are everywhere and it is part of social networks too.
We have WAY bigger problems than "people are signing up to one instance" (bluesky, twitter, people kidnapped in the US), but I hope for the best in your No True Scotsman challenge.
Those problems are in large part connected to centralised social networks being used to deliberately spread bigoted hatred etc. That's why I am trying to support decentralised social networks.
OK, so we are moving from "is centralized" to "will be centralized". That is different. I don't know if that is happening, but a conmon ecosystem will have instances few instances that are really big and many, many small ones. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_d…
I never said they were centralised, I said they are heading in that direction and if they carry on to the point where they actually centralise I would defederate.
They haven't yet reached 50% so I haven't yet defederated them.
I've used the #fediverse since 2017, had accounts on many different instances. A month ago i created my current account on #MastodonSocial because i was transferring over 1K music posts from #Bluesky where i had done a music discovery project earlier in 2025 but wanted to leave there and not lose all that work.
I chose Mastodon.social because it was a TON of work and i needed to know i was choosing an instance that could handle that many posts and wasn't going away.
I'd tend towards expressing that 28.7% is already sufficient to stop recommending mastodon.social, or any other big* server; that's too high a concentration for a decentralised network.
I'd therefore turn around and positively NOT recommend mastodon.social at this point. Obviously, nothing against mastodon.social or it's people, but for the general health of the network, (and for humanity!) Waiting until 40% would be too late.
I would not be so worried to establish at this time any hard percentages for limits or de-federation, I'd just hope that a campaign for conscientious of the reasons why not to join mastodon.social, the importance of small servers, and many of them, would be enough, and then deal with the other scenario if we ever get there, hopefully not.
* I'll admit I have an ideal about #fediverse servers, which is that the "community" of users on a server should reflect a #community that shares a reasonably close connection in some sense,
... show more
I'd tend towards expressing that 28.7% is already sufficient to stop recommending mastodon.social, or any other big* server; that's too high a concentration for a decentralised network.
I'd therefore turn around and positively NOT recommend mastodon.social at this point. Obviously, nothing against mastodon.social or it's people, but for the general health of the network, (and for humanity!) Waiting until 40% would be too late.
I would not be so worried to establish at this time any hard percentages for limits or de-federation, I'd just hope that a campaign for conscientious of the reasons why not to join mastodon.social, the importance of small servers, and many of them, would be enough, and then deal with the other scenario if we ever get there, hopefully not.
* I'll admit I have an ideal about #fediverse servers, which is that the "community" of users on a server should reflect a #community that shares a reasonably close connection in some sense, AFK, IRL or whatever way you want to say #offline. This in itself should limit numbers, without having to explicitly place those limits.
Of course I accept other people have other valid notions and do not share this idea, so some larger servers may work too.
The non-recommendation at 40% is about not recommending accounts to follow there on @FediFollows (currently I recommend following accounts from many places including mastodon.social).
I see, thanks for the clarification. That is a more difficult question.
I would not refrain from recommending an account that truly merits recommendation. But maybe in a toss up between a big server account and a more decentralised account, the bias could lean towards the latter. But i suppose space is not scarce in recommendation lists.
They wouldn't be equal in size. One instance would be bigger than all the other thousands of instances put together. It would be able to dictate terms to others, it could threaten to cut them off from most of the Fediverse by just defederating them.
Also mastodon.social wouldn't stop at 50%, it would keep growing.
Yeah, but splitting the fediverse up would balkanize it, not solve the disproportional growth of mastodon.social and also help the proprietary social media platforms (by balkanizing the fediverse)
I don’t disagree. I think your proposed solution to defederate is a step too far - a “cutting off your nose to spite your face” type of thing. Mind you, I don’t have a great counter proposal - which is unfair to you.
I get the concern I really do but I'm unconvinced that dot social is destroying the fediverse. If anything the culture of the fediverse is often its own worst enemy more than any large,popular instances. I get it.I'm inclined to that viewpoint myself but over time I've come to see that I'm fine with a large,popular, easy to onboard instance.I will eventually move (I keep wishing for data portability but factional devs & cost burdens nature of a non corp fedi = unlikely). Much respect.
IMHO it isn't a Fediverse if most of it is on one instance. It's just a centralised social network at that point, and all the comparatively tiny instances orbiting around it would be at the mercy of the supergiant.
I suspect that's why Meta chose their "small planets orbiting a big planet" logo for the Fediverse and rejected the one because they saw themselves as the supergiant.
I don't think that's decentralised, because it has a clear centre.
I don't disagree but blocking it due to its success (if it goes rogue then that's another matter) puzzles me because you have to at least ask why this is the case which is largely because it was there first, it's known, the admin created Mastodon and it's the default on boarding, and (for me unless I self host) it is dependable & well funded. I mean we're at least not Bluesky. Maybe Fedi should set a number limit per instance. It's hard to make decentralisation equal unless punitive.
The reason their percentage of the network is increasing is because in 2023 they changed the onboarding process so that new people are automatically told to sign up on mastodon.social.
It isn't, it's overcrowded and badly moderated compared to smaller servers as it has far fewer moderators per user.
... show more
No, that's not the situation at all.
The reason their percentage of the network is increasing is because in 2023 they changed the onboarding process so that new people are automatically told to sign up on mastodon.social.
We need to talk about Mastodon gGmbH. They are the main developers of Mastodon's server software & official mobile apps, they own mastodon.social and Mastodon's trademarks. Their behaviour is inexplicably going in two totally opposite directions.
A couple of years ago they started promoting mastodon.social from the official apps while hiding other servers, causing their server to grow while other servers shrank. Mastodon.social is currently about 28.7% of the active Fediverse and growing.
For comparison, another major server mas.to is just 1.2% of the active Fediverse. Mastodon.social is about twenty-four times bigger.
"It's hard to make decentralisation equal unless punitive."
It really isn't hard, they can just rotate which server they recommend in the onboarding so that the growth is spread out. They used to do this and it worked.
This is what Nextcloud does with its onboarding, for example, they have a pool of trusted servers and switch between then.
There are lots of servers with equally good or better moderation which have been around for years.
Well yes that's one option (getting the wide world of fedi to agree on implementing that is a different mountain) but what if after that happens that those people who don't get why they can't see posts from an instance their mate or a specific user is on just say to hell with it I might as well be on the same instance. I'm all for equality of opportunity but guaranteeing an equal outcome is harder. People are a funny bunch and try as we might they will go where they feel at home.
"what if after that happens that those people who don't get why they can't see posts from an instance their mate or a specific user is on just say to hell with it I might as well be on the same instance."
They can see them, you and I are having a conversation right now despite being on different instances.
"(getting the wide world of fedi to agree on implementing that is a different mountain)"
I'm just talking about the official Mastodon app, not every app.
@homegrown@social.growyourown.services I don't really understand what recommending accounts has to do with avoiding a monopoly. Like, whether you recommend a mastodon.social account should be decided based on whether you think the account deserves the recommendation, not which server they're on. You're not telling people to switch to that server, you're telling them to follow an account there.
If one server is bigger than all the other servers put together, then it's no longer a decentralised network and all the problems we see on Twitter/X, Meta/Facebook etc are likely to start happening.
They could sell out easily, they could even stop federating.
The Fediverse is protected from takeover when we are spread out. When we go onto one server we are no longer protected.
Alex the Christmas Chap🎄🎅
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to Alex the Christmas Chap🎄🎅 • • •@alexchapman
It's not a personal attack on users, I just don't want to be giving up most of my spare time to help someone build a centralised social network they control. It feels pointless, it would be like doing free tech support for Twitter.
I run my accounts and sites to help build a decentralised network that no one controls.
Alex the Christmas Chap🎄🎅
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •DB Schwein
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •neither which should be the server new people are being pointed at.
Lutin Discret
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to Lutin Discret • • •I'm not bashing m.s, I'm bashing Mastodon gGmbH promoting an instance that is about to take over the entire network when the network is supposed to be decentralised.
There are plenty of nice instances with better community moderation which I promote every day at @FediGarden and list at fedi.garden but it's hard to get new people to know about them because Mastodon gGmbH won't mention anyone but their own server on the front page of their trademarked app.
Fedi.Garden
fedi.gardenTim Richards
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to Tim Richards • • •That's pretty much what I suggest in the thread: social.chinwag.org/@FediThing/…
Mastodon.social is just so much bigger than the others, it is twenty-four times larger than mas.to for example. It is far far too big.
FediThing
2025-11-04 15:25:00
Anꞇóin Ó B.
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •I'd suggest announcing to followers on M.s. a plan to defederate in (say)12 months time if the Fediverse is more centralised than it was at the time you announced the plan.
Works on a clearly understandable timeframe and makes anyone blaming you look absurd since you're just sticking to your ideals and doing exactly what you announced when you said you would.
Plus, if anyone is really angry, yet didn't decide it'd be worth moving instance when they'd a whole year, they're no loss.
Grow Your Own Services ❄️
Unknown parent • • •@Chapz
I'm well aware of the average joe, I run @FediTips and fedi.tips
Most of my spare time is spent helping the average joe join and use this place. I have been doing this for five years now.
I spend most of my time on here putting myself in that mindset.
Fedi.Tips – An Unofficial Guide to Mastodon and the Fediverse
fedi.tipsBoor
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to Boor • • •The whole point of the Fediverse is that it isn't centralised.
Centralisation destroys the entire point of the Fediverse.
If the Fediverse becomes centralised, all the bad stuff that happened to Twitter, Facebook etc can happen to the Fediverse.
I wrote an article about this at fedi.tips/its-a-really-bad-ide…
Mastodon.social is not a good way to join Mastodon. If you’re already on it, you might want to move your account to a different Mastodon server. | Fedi.Tips – An Unofficial Guide to Mastodon and the Fediverse
fedi.tipsBoor
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •yes, I understand the risks of centralization. Have any of them materialized on mastodon.social?
My major concerns with traditional social media boil down to 1) opaque, proprietary algorithm, and 2) corporate ownership = profit motive = surveillance ad economy.
So far as I know, mastodon.social passes both items for the time being. If they fail at some point in the future, I will move posthaste.
Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to Boor • • •@boor
"My major concerns with traditional social media boil down to 1) opaque, proprietary algorithm, and 2) corporate ownership = profit motive = surveillance ad economy. "
All of those are far, far easier to do on centralised networks.
I have written an article on this too: fedi.tips/why-is-the-fediverse…
Once you centralise, it becomes trivial for bad people to take over a project. Even non-profits can come under the control of major donors.
Why is the Fediverse on so many separate servers? | Fedi.Tips – An Unofficial Guide to Mastodon and the Fediverse
fedi.tipsBoor
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to Boor • • •If they go to the dark side with most people on there, they could just switch off federation.
I'm also concerned about what happens to the server software development if most people are on one instance that they control. They might decide to de-prioritise federation features because they are technically the most difficult and time-consuming, and if everyone's on one instance federation might start to be seen as a side-issue.
A
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to A • • •I am giving most of my spare time to running accounts and websites helping people use the Fediverse.
I do this because I want to help build a social network owned by the grassroots, because I think this is important for society.
I'm not going to give my free time just to build a network that is controlled by one person or one organisation. It would be pointless, it would just be another Twitter.
A
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Good luck with your maximalist crusade then. As I mentioned, power laws are everywhere and it is part of social networks too.
We have WAY bigger problems than "people are signing up to one instance" (bluesky, twitter, people kidnapped in the US), but I hope for the best in your No True Scotsman challenge.
Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to A • • •@a
"Good luck with your maximalist crusade then. "
It's not maximalist to ask that a decentralised network stays decentralised. It's by definition a minimum requirement.
" I hope for the best in your No True Scotsman challenge."
You're kind of going into troll territory there, might want to dial it back a bit?
Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to A • • •"We have WAY bigger problems"
Those problems are in large part connected to centralised social networks being used to deliberately spread bigoted hatred etc. That's why I am trying to support decentralised social networks.
Here's what centralised networks do: thebureauinvestigates.com/stor…
Facebook accused by survivors of letting activists incite ethnic massacres with hate and misinformation in Ethiopia
Jasper Jackson (The Bureau of Investigative Journalism)A
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •I know what centralized networks do. Fediverse is not that and making a comparison with facebook is absurd
arewedecentralizedyet.online/
Are We Decentralized Yet?
arewedecentralizedyet.onlineGrow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to A • • •@a
It will be centralised if mastodon.social starts having a majority of users on it.
A
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •probability distribution
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to A • • •I never said they were centralised, I said they are heading in that direction and if they carry on to the point where they actually centralise I would defederate.
They haven't yet reached 50% so I haven't yet defederated them.
Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to A • • •"a conmon ecosystem will have instances few instances that are really big and many, many small ones."
This wouldn't be a few big ones, it would be one enormous one that is bigger than all the rest put together.
They haven't reach that but they are heading that way if they carry on at this rate.
🦄 🅃🅁🄰🄽🅂🄸🄲🄾🅁🄽 🏳️⚧️
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •I've used the #fediverse since 2017, had accounts on many different instances. A month ago i created my current account on #MastodonSocial because i was transferring over 1K music posts from #Bluesky where i had done a music discovery project earlier in 2025 but wanted to leave there and not lose all that work.
I chose Mastodon.social because it was a TON of work and i needed to know i was choosing an instance that could handle that many posts and wasn't going away.
Keith Whyte
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •I'd tend towards expressing that 28.7% is already sufficient to stop recommending mastodon.social, or any other big* server; that's too high a concentration for a decentralised network.
I'd therefore turn around and positively NOT recommend mastodon.social at this point. Obviously, nothing against mastodon.social or it's people, but for the general health of the network, (and for humanity!) Waiting until 40% would be too late.
I would not be so worried to establish at this time any hard percentages for limits or de-federation, I'd just hope that a campaign for conscientious of the reasons why not to join mastodon.social, the importance of small servers, and many of them, would be enough, and then deal with the other scenario if we ever get there, hopefully not.
* I'll admit I have an ideal about #fediverse servers, which is that the "community" of users on a server should reflect a #community that shares a reasonably close connection in some sense,
... show moreI'd tend towards expressing that 28.7% is already sufficient to stop recommending mastodon.social, or any other big* server; that's too high a concentration for a decentralised network.
I'd therefore turn around and positively NOT recommend mastodon.social at this point. Obviously, nothing against mastodon.social or it's people, but for the general health of the network, (and for humanity!) Waiting until 40% would be too late.
I would not be so worried to establish at this time any hard percentages for limits or de-federation, I'd just hope that a campaign for conscientious of the reasons why not to join mastodon.social, the importance of small servers, and many of them, would be enough, and then deal with the other scenario if we ever get there, hopefully not.
* I'll admit I have an ideal about #fediverse servers, which is that the "community" of users on a server should reflect a #community that shares a reasonably close connection in some sense, AFK, IRL or whatever way you want to say #offline. This in itself should limit numbers, without having to explicitly place those limits.
Of course I accept other people have other valid notions and do not share this idea, so some larger servers may work too.
Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to Keith Whyte • • •"I'd therefore turn around and positively NOT recommend mastodon.social at this point"
I've been saying not to join mastodon.social for several years now, article at fedi.tips/its-a-really-bad-ide…
The non-recommendation at 40% is about not recommending accounts to follow there on @FediFollows (currently I recommend following accounts from many places including mastodon.social).
Mastodon.social is not a good way to join Mastodon. If you’re already on it, you might want to move your account to a different Mastodon server. | Fedi.Tips – An Unofficial Guide to Mastodon and the Fediverse
fedi.tipsKeith Whyte
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •I see, thanks for the clarification.
That is a more difficult question.
I would not refrain from recommending an account that truly merits recommendation. But maybe in a toss up between a big server account and a more decentralised account, the bias could lean towards the latter. But i suppose space is not scarce in recommendation lists.
Vinicius (PY2VMH)
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to Vinicius (PY2VMH) • • •They wouldn't be equal in size. One instance would be bigger than all the other thousands of instances put together. It would be able to dictate terms to others, it could threaten to cut them off from most of the Fediverse by just defederating them.
Also mastodon.social wouldn't stop at 50%, it would keep growing.
Vinicius (PY2VMH)
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Chris Deluca
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to Chris Deluca • • •@chris
Centralising the Fediverse is surely much worse?
Chris Deluca
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to Chris Deluca • • •This account has moved
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •If anything the culture of the fediverse is often its own worst enemy more than any large,popular instances.
I get it.I'm inclined to that viewpoint myself but over time I've come to see that I'm fine with a large,popular, easy to onboard instance.I will eventually move (I keep wishing for data portability but factional devs & cost burdens nature of a non corp fedi = unlikely). Much respect.
Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to This account has moved • • •IMHO it isn't a Fediverse if most of it is on one instance. It's just a centralised social network at that point, and all the comparatively tiny instances orbiting around it would be at the mercy of the supergiant.
I suspect that's why Meta chose their "small planets orbiting a big planet" logo for the Fediverse and rejected the
one because they saw themselves as the supergiant.
I don't think that's decentralised, because it has a clear centre.
This account has moved
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to This account has moved • • •No, that's not the situation at all.
The reason their percentage of the network is increasing is because in 2023 they changed the onboarding process so that new people are automatically told to sign up on mastodon.social.
This is causing the network to centralise, I go into detail in the thread at social.chinwag.org/@FediThing/…
"it is dependable & well funded"
It isn't, it's overcrowded and badly moderated compared to smaller servers as it has far fewer moderators per user.
No, that's not the situation at all.
The reason their percentage of the network is increasing is because in 2023 they changed the onboarding process so that new people are automatically told to sign up on mastodon.social.
This is causing the network to centralise, I go into detail in the thread at social.chinwag.org/@FediThing/…
"it is dependable & well funded"
It isn't, it's overcrowded and badly moderated compared to smaller servers as it has far fewer moderators per user.
FediThing
2025-11-04 15:25:00
Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •"It's hard to make decentralisation equal unless punitive."
It really isn't hard, they can just rotate which server they recommend in the onboarding so that the growth is spread out. They used to do this and it worked.
This is what Nextcloud does with its onboarding, for example, they have a pool of trusted servers and switch between then.
There are lots of servers with equally good or better moderation which have been around for years.
This account has moved
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to This account has moved • • •"what if after that happens that those people who don't get why they can't see posts from an instance their mate or a specific user is on just say to hell with it I might as well be on the same instance."
They can see them, you and I are having a conversation right now despite being on different instances.
"(getting the wide world of fedi to agree on implementing that is a different mountain)"
I'm just talking about the official Mastodon app, not every app.
This account has moved
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Pamasich
in reply to Grow Your Own Services ❄️ • • •Grow Your Own Services ❄️
in reply to Pamasich • • •@Pamasich
If one server is bigger than all the other servers put together, then it's no longer a decentralised network and all the problems we see on Twitter/X, Meta/Facebook etc are likely to start happening.
They could sell out easily, they could even stop federating.
The Fediverse is protected from takeover when we are spread out. When we go onto one server we are no longer protected.
More info at fedi.tips/why-is-the-fediverse…
Why is the Fediverse on so many separate servers? | Fedi.Tips – An Unofficial Guide to Mastodon and the Fediverse
fedi.tips