Yesterday, users of mstdn.social instance lost their connections to artists at mastodon.art instance ( src: framapiaf.org/@Curator@mastodo… ). I hope giving visibility to this issue will help them to restore the broken bridges.
We're no longer blocked by mstdn.social, but I don't know if that's subject to change. Unfortunately, when an instance suspends another instance, all follow/follower relationships are immediately broken and aren't recovered by un-suspending, so you w…
@MagicLike to be frank, someone who blocks 30,000 people "as an action of the moment" which was "emotionally influenced" (you might call it a hissy fit) is not fit to be admin.
@amberage @MagicLike @amberage Yes, but I also thought it was a bit late to rub salt in the wound that's why I selected my words to focus on the rebuilding part
Rebuilding this might need a bit of accountability and a structure which makes such mistakes harder in the future.
No one needs their emotions wired directly into a pain button that hurts thousands and stux needs to make sure this not not how mstd blocking works in future.
@p Hehe, it's a sketch from 2019 and it's fun because I made my first real work of masonry last week, and if I had to redraw it, I would do it differently. Mortar paste can't be that sticky and solid. I was shocked to see how it was more like mud with sand in it, gluing nothing, and requiring casing for any volumes. So, I totally agree with your observations. 😺
pardon my ignorance, is "mstdn.social" the same as "mastodon.social" or a different instance?
Is there any kind of documentation on how to keep track of who I'm following so that I can restore broken follows the next time mastodon.social breaks the fediverse or is otherwise excommunicated by other instances?
@manicdee They are different, but I also mixed up the two instances at first so I think many will have the same feeling. Their naming really overlaps too much; it just sounds like one is the URL shortening of the second... I could disambiguate the two by their number of active users mainly:
thank you for the clarification. Now I can try to understand my options for the rest of my questions at a more relaxing pace :D Although I'm sure it's only a matter of time before mastodon.social gets in trouble for what the people that use it are saying or doing.
It was a matter of time. This is my one problem with mastodon. They can't take over the platform but that doesn't mean us users have the power. It's the instance admins instead of a big company...
I'm on mstdn.social and my follow list is still full of people from mastodon.art. Their profiles wouldn't display during the brief period the server was blocked, but there wasn't a permanent severed connection that I can see.
This does rather overlook the slight detail that mastodon.art have themselves suspended multiple popular instances for entirely arbitrary and bizarre reasons. mastodon.art/about
for me the particulars of this incident aren't the most important thing. My takeaway is that no instance that wants to be taken seriously should be able to take action like this based on just one person's feelings. Collective decision making helps us be better than we would be alone.
to be honest, I think it is not ok to fully blocked an instance, since this is anti-fediverse. @Mastodon should remove “block a server” function, as this gives the admin the superpower over what the users on their server can see and interact. Simply silence a server from appearing in one server’s public timeline should be the ultimate solution. Every user/ resident in one server should have the freedom to choose what they can see.
@Henry there are instances that really everybody wants to block at a server level, because they aren't sending any kind of useful message but just plain, uncontroversially, spam.
Our instance only has less than 10 active users and no open registration, so we can afford do be very permissive, and we still have a blocklist that is mostly filled with those.
Then there are instances that have been created with the explicit intent to host people accounts dedicated to harass other people: one may prefer a place where these are blocked in advance or one where blocks only happen after the fact, but while under active attack you don't really want every user on a server to suffer from them either.
And then there is simply the fact that some user will want to manage their own block list, but others are much more happy knowing that an admin *they trust* has done most of the work.
The point is that the fediverse gives you the choice to be on a server where you trust the admin and like their policies, removing instance blocks from everybody (or enforcing them for everybody, if it was technically possible) would make it worse, not better.
(Aah, can’t keep it in. Viking helmets didn’t have horns:) That looks like a Wagner opera:) But I don’t think it takes away from the image. It kinda makes me think of some management type game. Like a Settlers of the World type game.)
Questo sito utilizza cookie per riconosce gli utenti loggati e quelli che tornano a visitare. Proseguendo la navigazione su questo sito, accetti l'utilizzo di questi cookie.
Off On One
in reply to David Revoy • • •Mx Amber Alex (she/it)
in reply to David Revoy • • •MagicLike 🏳️🌈
in reply to Mx Amber Alex (she/it) • • •Mx Amber Alex (she/it)
in reply to MagicLike 🏳️🌈 • • •David Revoy
in reply to Mx Amber Alex (she/it) • • •Kit Rhett Aultman
in reply to David Revoy • • •Abandoned
in reply to David Revoy • • •@amberage @MagicLike
Rebuilding this might need a bit of accountability and a structure which makes such mistakes harder in the future.
No one needs their emotions wired directly into a pain button that hurts thousands and stux needs to make sure this not not how mstd blocking works in future.
Off On One
in reply to MagicLike 🏳️🌈 • • •p
in reply to David Revoy • • •@davidrevoy
David Revoy
in reply to p • • •Elena ``of Valhalla'' likes this.
Madayar
in reply to David Revoy • • •Pietervdvn 🔜 FOSDEM 😷
in reply to David Revoy • • •ManicDee
in reply to David Revoy • • •pardon my ignorance, is "mstdn.social" the same as "mastodon.social" or a different instance?
Is there any kind of documentation on how to keep track of who I'm following so that I can restore broken follows the next time mastodon.social breaks the fediverse or is otherwise excommunicated by other instances?
David Revoy
in reply to ManicDee • • •@manicdee They are different, but I also mixed up the two instances at first so I think many will have the same feeling. Their naming really overlaps too much; it just sounds like one is the URL shortening of the second... I could disambiguate the two by their number of active users mainly:
- mstdn.social/explore (31K active users)
- mastodon.social/explore (220K active users)
Mastodon 🐘
Mastodon hosted on mstdn.socialManicDee
in reply to David Revoy • • •Experiencer (Mastodon)
in reply to David Revoy • • •Helgi Crookehorne
in reply to David Revoy • • •nellie-m
in reply to David Revoy • • •CEbbinghaus
in reply to David Revoy • • •Tonya Canning
in reply to David Revoy • • •Hughster
in reply to David Revoy • • •mastodon.art/about
Shephallmassive
in reply to David Revoy • • •Loukas (They/Them) 🏳️⚧️
in reply to David Revoy • • •Henry
in reply to David Revoy • • •Elena ``of Valhalla''
in reply to Henry • •@Henry there are instances that really everybody wants to block at a server level, because they aren't sending any kind of useful message but just plain, uncontroversially, spam.
Our instance only has less than 10 active users and no open registration, so we can afford do be very permissive, and we still have a blocklist that is mostly filled with those.
Then there are instances that have been created with the explicit intent to host people accounts dedicated to harass other people: one may prefer a place where these are blocked in advance or one where blocks only happen after the fact, but while under active attack you don't really want every user on a server to suffer from them either.
And then there is simply the fact that some user will want to manage their own block list, but others are much more happy knowing that an admin *they trust* has done most of the work.
The point is that the fediverse gives you the choice to be on a server where you trust the admin and like their policies, removing instance blocks from everybody (or enforcing them for everybody, if it was technically possible) would make it worse, not better.
florian :flan_hacker:
in reply to David Revoy • • •Gen X-Wing
in reply to David Revoy • • •That is a lovely piece of art!
(Aah, can’t keep it in. Viking helmets didn’t have horns:) That looks like a Wagner opera:) But I don’t think it takes away from the image. It kinda makes me think of some management type game. Like a Settlers of the World type game.)
Arne Babenhauserheide
in reply to David Revoy • • •