friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

I think it is a bad idea for instance admins (fediverse) to ban entire instances. Unless there is a very very very serious motive behind it. And make it public when you do. Because this will cut ties with those instances and the users from your own instance will be unable to reach anyone from those banned instances. This is a dangerous game that many on the fediverse are playing. They seem to not grasp the consequences.

If we ever ban any instance then we will first announce it to all of our users, and then make it public. But unless there is severe spam flooding our servers, I do not see a reason to do that.

Users can block other users and for some federated networks they can block entire instances. Let the users decide! Not a handful of "admins". #tromlive

#tromlive

reshared this

in reply to Rokosun

mastodon - Link to source

Jeena

I'm admin on both so i might have a bit of a wrong perspective on things. But yeah from what you say it's a bit better in this regard for the user.

What I tried to say was that it's easier for an admin because they don't have a discovery page which shows stuff from other instances, therefor no real need to block instances nor to follow instances as an admin.

But if you're not admin and the admin blocks stuff it's not nice. At least you can move to a different instance.

in reply to Jeena

mastodon - Link to source

Jeena

On Peertube the Admin can follow whole instances which I tried to do, to get recommendations, but then pictures of naked people would show up as recommended under videos about children in my extended family so I removed all big instances and only follow very small ones. Since last update there is a great feature that the Admin can follow specific channels instead to need to follow a whole instance. It's much easier to keep your list of channels clean.
Unknown parent

friendica (DFRN) - Link to source

Tio

That's the issue tho, you can get blocked (instance wise) and you won't be able to follow anyone and such. That's a bad practice. Imagine if you are banned by several major mastodon platforms, what do you do then? This is a mob-like approach that I do not support.
in reply to 𝚜𝚎𝚕𝚎𝚊

mastodon - Link to source

Rokosun

Email is a federated service just like the fediverse, and now Gmail & Yahoo mail instance is so big that they have more power over the network. And they're blocking other email servers left & right, without much thought. The same thing can happen on fediverse, even now we have big instances like mastodon.social with most of the users on the network. This is a limitation of the federation approach, we'd have to move to p2p networks like scuttlebutt.nz in the future.
@tio

Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!
Mastodon hosted on mastodon.social
@Tio
in reply to LPS

mastodon - Link to source

Rokosun

From what I understand, scuttlebutt can be used to connect directly with peers. Pubs are just optional, and they have the same power as a user on scuttlebutt, the only difference is that it'll be online most of the time. I hope they don't fuck things up with this reputation system of theirs, but if its a decentralized kinda system that can be used by you & your friends without much global impact, that seems OK to me.
@tio @selea
@Tio @𝚜𝚎𝚕𝚎𝚊
in reply to Rokosun

mastodon - Link to source

Rokosun

I like moderation to be like how adblockers work today, we make a list of users that could be blocked, and we categorise them into topics like nudity, violence, etc. so we can choose what to block. This kinda system should be opt in and shouldn't block anyone by default. Ublock origin allows us to use different blocklists, so we can change from one to other easily, the same should be true here. If a blocklist has problems, we can criticize it and/or fork it if necessary.
⇧