[dijit]

Yes, but the main difference is that twitter (and all the centralised social media players) are trying to have their cake and eat it.

> You can't prosecute us for things that are published as we are a platform for communication, we're not responsible for what's communicated!

> We can moderate and ban you for saying things we disagree with based on what we interpret our "rules" to be (in social media's case: whatever the West-Coast likes and Copyright violations)

With Mastodon (or phpbb forums of yore) the former is false, so it's at least internally consistent, and of course you have the choice to move away, it's not 1 moderation style for the whole planet across all cultures.

[MarkPNeyer]

Completely agree! A world with lots of private property that people can enter and exit freely is one compatible with liberalism. A giant privately owned public square is a terrible idea.

[dijit]

A giant public square where the rules are equal for everyone can coexist too.

We have that, with public roads and parks.

"Here's the rules: don't litter, don't get naked, don't yell and follow people"

What I'm saying is that you can be one or the other, but not both.

Mastodon doesn't pretend to be anything other than private property.

Twitter pretends to be a public place, like a park or a giant square.