If the goal is solidarity and community, creating a world where little feudal lords reign over independent territories and negotiate the terms of the interchange of ideas can hardly be the best answer. I very much understand that in times of rising authoritarianism such an escape into decentralised resistance is alluring to progressive political movements. But this is a temporary fix at best. It is not a progressive vision for what comes after. Decentralisation without social institutions that debate, define and – when necessary – enforce fairness and equality is a euphemism for survival of the fittest.
Imagine Mastodon had a governance system where all users, admins and minorities were equally represented. Imagine this system intervened in the practices of some admins. Right now I can only imagine the Mastodon community to react with an outcry about such an audacious attack on their free and decentralised kingdom. This reaction would be completely in line with libertarian impulses that are so very present in all things digital. Cyberlibertarians routinely invoke the “free internet” as a vague supreme ideal that has to be defended against any kind of collective, democratic governance. Their ideology is based on private control and decentralised market-based exchange. It has no use for community, solidarity and participation. It is founded on contempt for democratic intervention, a belief in the unique nature of the digital realm and the superiority of those controlling it. These ideas are very present in the Mastodon community as well. Most often this is not the result of an active ideological commitment to libertarian or right-wing views. It is, however, very open to being instrumentalised by these ideologies and it is reinforcing them – willingly or not.
This is basically an article arguing for a fedi equivalent of the UN.
In case of the Threadiverse lack of account portability isn’t that much of an issue unless you really care about karma which thankfully is discouraged systemically here. With Mastodon I kind of understand it because you need to port over friends who follow you but this has no equivalent in the Threadiverse. If you need to move you can just export your settings and you’re off on your merry way.
I’m not a fan of Lemmy.world either but they cater to people who don’t really care about what they chose. It’s not like they are trapped there. If they’re fine with Zionism then at least I know it based on their user handle, which is another benefit of those little kingdoms.
I've composed some really high quality comments and posts on this account which I would rather not lose if pawb.social somehow goes rogue.
But, really, it's the communities being tied to instances that is a far bigger problem. Most lemmy.world users are anti-zionist and unaware of the admin team biases. It's unfair and misleading to assume a lemmy.world user is zionist just from their instance, and plenty of communities have been created there which are the de-facto fediverse defaults for the topic, and thus subject to the whims of the lemmy.world admin/mod team.
Basically, community moderators are like vassals to the instance admins/moderators, who are functionally lords, who serve at the pleasure of the instance owner/host, functionally the kings.
It's a really serious issue, and I think we should address it sooner rather than later by decentralizing away from lemmy.world and lemmy.ml, but that's difficult to do now that the communities are already established, and would likely be resisted by lemmy.world who have an incentive to maintain their position of dominance.
Piefed already does have a community migration system - But it's long-term goal is to make communities completely modular, allowing a community owner to completely move an entire community from one instance to another. I have even called for it to also shift subscribers of that community too when a community moves.
Account shifting in the same way hasn't been spoken about, but it sounds like a good idea.
This content was backed up to multiple instances so it won’t be lost that easily. Fediverse platforms/protocols aren’t that great at archival so I embrace that this is more of a place of discussion rather than storage which traditional forums excel at.
The difference being that you can create your own kingdom easily because we have access to unlimited land and resources, making any attempt at control futile, which is something that kings have to keep in mind.
I’m doing my part by not contributing any content to communities hosted on those instances but we can’t make people happy against their will. If you’re worried that we need to outcompete them in some popularity metrics remember that half of humanity is dumber than an average person ;)
It feels like you're glossing over the problem. If the lemmy.world admins start oppressing furries, for example, very few people are going to migrate away from lemmy.world to replacement communities on pawb.social, they're just going to remain on the anti-furry lemmy.world communities, which will continue to grow and disenfranchise furries, and most users probably wouldn't even notice the problem.
It's all well and good to say "you can just spin up your own instance and create whatever communities you want", but if nobody is going to read my posts and comments I may as well post them into a sewage drain.
I would imagine that in this hypothetical scenario furries would be able to move to a new instance and keep reading their own posts without further interruption. If they wouldn’t move then they weren’t a community and just a bunch of random people. Then again I’m a person to build a vampire castle and keep posting into the void because too much popularity is annoying.
Sure, the furries can do that, but that just creates essentially segregated communities, and there are far fewer furries than non-furries. It really feels like you just want to pretend this isn't a problem, but I'm not sure why
I understand now that this is probably not a hypothetical scenario but I still believe that no instance owner owes a service to anyone. Thankfully we’re using a communication protocol that allows us to continue talking even if LW banned our accounts right now.
I'm not arguing that instance operators must be compelled to host communities or users they don't want to - just that the centralization of communities is a big issue for free speech and expression. I'm saying that we should acknowledge the problem and work to mitigate it.
Agreed.
Interestingly enough this is something that later Dune novels touch on a lot.
God Emperor of Dune spoilers
Leto II had to put humanity through millennia of abuse for it to learn that dispersing is the best form of resisting tyranny.I feel that we don’t have necessary tools to change nature of humanity but I’m happy we have Fediverse.