@JohnDoelike it is at Twitter, instead it is qualified with which instance they are on like
@JohnDoe@mastodon.socialin order to specify which
@JohnDoeis being referenced. And, yep, that means
@JohnDoecan exist at different instances, that part of the account name is not unique across all of "Mastodon", it is just unique to the instance. When trying to explain it I've seen a lot of articles compare it to email accounts where
JohnDoeis not a unique name across all of the various email systems, it is just unique to the email provider like
JohnDoe@yahoo.comand so on.
@JohnDoeto follow them only to find out there there are 20 different accounts with names like
@JohnDoe@GuysWhoWearSuspenders.comand they have no way of knowing which one is the one they want.
I agree with John King.Kevin, thanks for the detailed explanation. Looks good.
However, I have MONUMENTAL indifference to both the twitterati and the glitterati.
I think that conveys my feelings without going into further detail about self-important gits, and such like ...
Hmm, I'm not sure the algorithmic feeds of Facebook-Instagram and Twitter are something users particularly want. As opposed to defaults the companies like to push because of the user experience control they provide—most people will just go with the default use model they're presented with. It's been some time since I've accessed Facebook regularly and I've only barely used Instagram. Much of the reason for that is algorithmic changes Facebook was making a while ago suppressed essentially all of the content I and my friends were interested in. The result was a network collapse where 97+% of the hundreds of connections I had quit posting. For the remainder, I found if I wanted to actually see their activity I had to circumvent the algorithmic feed by accessing their pages directly.This isn't the web experience the mass of users demand. But I like it.
Pretty similar for me, but captive eyeballs maximize advertising revenue and some of that (albeit quite arguably not enough) does pay for moderation. If Mastodon traffic stays up I'm curious how sustainable its current volunteer based approach to modding will be. Even in relatively conflict free zones of low trolling interest, such as Duolingo's question pages, I've encountered a notable amount of moderator complaints about how poor their experience is on volunteer contributed courses. Disqus' management model has some major limitations as well.I really dislike platforms designed to keep people inside them.
I think that's a good point. Most people don't take the time to make their web experiences actually worth their time.Hmm, I'm not sure the algorithmic feeds of Facebook-Instagram and Twitter are something users particularly want. As opposed to defaults the companies like to push because of the user experience control they provide—most people will just go with the default use model they're presented with.
And that gets to the bottom of things all right. The costs of these platforms are so high because they draw in so many eyeballs. Again, I'm dumb and old, but the model of someone having a little website and paying for hosting and/or coding is just so much more appealing to me. Old capitalism, not this new, intentionally obfuscating, manipulative beast its been allowed to transform itself into.but captive eyeballs maximize advertising revenue and some of that (albeit quite arguably not enough) does pay for moderation.
Just make sure that you migrate before the first instance shuts down because it needs to be up & responding to requests for your account to transfer. I don't recall the exact timeframe at the moment but somewhere in the docs there is a recommendation that instance admins provide prior notice of at least three(?) months before shutting down.if an instance closes down it seems there is a process to "migrate" to another instance
Using Patreon for recurring payments is the most popular choice I'm seeing with instance admins asking for donations.One other point to note is nothing is free. Some of the instances ask for donations to defray the costs of running the instance
Yep, the Mastodon Server Covenant specifies three months minimum.somewhere in the docs there is a recommendation that instance admins provide prior notice of at least three(?) months before shutting down
I did that for the better part of two decades. Posting the same content on Facebook tended to get around three orders of magnitude more engagement. I also built a couple websites for small nonprofits and then maintained them for years. We found if we wanted to drive traffic the single most effective SEO type thingy was to give Facebook the equivalent of US$ 5 or €5ish for a boosted post (this was pre-Meta). I agree with the appeal of building things like Wordpress themes but, if you have individually generated content you want people to see, less exploitative corporate options like Bandcamp, Github, Patreon, Substack, and Webtoon can be useful tools if there's niche alignment.the model of someone having a little website and paying for hosting and/or coding is just so much more appealing to me
Quite possibly. Other companies operating ad funded web media have avoided the choices made by Meta and Twitter, though, so I'm finding it a bit challenging to convince myself it's more the ads than it is the people making management decisions about advertising revenue streams. There's probably some interesting business analysis around that, though it's not an area I've looked into.I think if there's a saving grace to Mastodon, it has to be the non ad-supported concept of it, if it can maintain that.