[tolerance]

> If you need your static site to be on atproto (yay!), you can just have one of the various PDS hosts (such as Bluesky or eurosky or black sky or npmx) host the PDS for your. Since it is authenticated and user sovereign, you can permissionlessly move to a different host whenever you please, should that go awry.

These seems to defeat the purpose of the relative amount of sovereignty that hosting a static site gives you compared to depending on a PDS.

> It's unclear to me why static site needs are an interesting or useful target that social networking ought conform to.

How is this possible?

[jauntywundrkind]

Your data is still signed by you, and you still have the keys to move your PDS no matter what happens to your host. Do you have an actual threat model or reason why you are so afraid / unwilling to accept any compromise?

Your lack of a reply at the end, refusing to support basically your entire ask with even a modicum of supporting cause, feels a bit vindicating, that indeed you are a hostile agent & not here to engage or discuss, but to throw bombs.

[tolerance]

> Do you have an actual threat model or reason why you are so afraid / unwilling to accept any compromise?

Have we met?