|
|
|
|
|
|
by witheld
1246 days ago
|
|
|
You are making your own assumptions about what Mastodon is and you’re mad that you’re wrong. “Federated twitter” does not imply any of the things you think it does. Twitter has moderation. Federated twitter has moderation. Twitter is a platform focused on communities. Federated twitter is even more focused on communities. Twitter is run by faceless nobodies and Elon Musk. Mastodon is run by Eugen if you join his instance, or your friends if you join their instance. In NO WAY does federation imply 1) That it’s like email 2) Less moderation 3) Privacy 4) No politics 5) Any of the other weird shit you assumed The only single thing federation implies is that the servers are run by independent operators. |
|
|
Yes, and if Elon Musk and faceless nobodies change the content policy that affects which accounts get banned, it's international news.
If Eugen kicks you off his server without notice because you mentioned your Twitter account, nobody cares.
Unless you pre-emptively prepare for being banned, you're SOL, and all your data is gone. [1]
A Federated Twitter would allow the user to get their data and migrate to another instance after being banned from the one they signed up with.
Being tied to your particular fiefdom (pardon me, instance) for life (of the account) is a feudal model.
>In NO WAY does federation imply... that it’s like email
The way Mastodon implements "federation" does.
It's exactly like email in the aspect of joining servers, and depending on that server for having access to the service. Including compliance with whatever rules that server sets.
It's exactly like email in that if your email server admin decides they don't like @gmail.com accounts, you won't be able to send or receive messages from that domain, regardless of how you feel about that[2].
>Any of the other weird shit you assumed
See [1] and [2].
[1]https://www.reddit.com/r/Mastodon/comments/zusr5l/what_happe...
[2] https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/issues/8911