Fedi.Tips@FediTips@social.growyourown.services
@julian@fietkau.social
You're basically suggesting killing the Fediverse for the sake of making it easier.
Do you know what percentage will "bounce" if it no longer has any advantages over much bigger alternatives?
What, exactly, is the point of a Fediverse that operates on one server? Where is the advantage over Bluesky or Twitter/X for that matter?
There would be nothing left of it, it would be just another centralised network owned by a single company that eventually enshittifies.
River@riverpunk@defcon.social
@FediTips@social.growyourown.services @julian@fietkau.social I'd like to point out that small, sustained growth over time while sticking to founding principles is infinitely more beneficial to users of the network, as compared to viral success at the cost of abandoning those principles.
I wanna see Mastodon take off big as much as everyone else, but not if that just means another tech monopoly that has a cool open protocol for a while before they finally extinguish when some billionaire buys it and decides to lock everyone in and start enshittifying.
That's basically how I see this tradeoff. Some users are gonna take longer to get on, but hey, at least that way, the thing they're getting on is a decentralized network, not a single platform that is only open in theory.
