Here’s an idea: let’s call people “people” on the fediverse instead of “users” whenever we can.

Compare:

“There are 42 users on this instance.”

vs

“There are 42 people on this instance.”

Which acknowledges our humanity more?

Language matters. We don’t need to perpetuate mainstream technology’s othering/colonial framing of “us” – designers/developers/other “clever folks” – and “them” – the users (usually one step removed from “dumb user” and usually the ones who get used).

#peopleNotUsers

@aral hah, that reminds me of this ancient blogpost of mine:
https://rys.io/en/43.html

> [R]ights and freedoms that we defend are citizen’s, not user’s. We should not be ashamed to call upon them if we’re supposed to defend them! And seemingly all other sides to this dispute (and many beside it) have to be reminded, over and over again, that people are citizens first and foremost; they can be users afterwards.

@rysiek consider that a person may have several accounts, so i suggest "there are 42 accounts" @aral

@aaronwinstonsmith @rysiek @aral

Also bots, aren't people, but they may still have an account 8-)

@aaronwinstonsmith are folks confused that having an account on one instance implies you aren't also on others? Or can't have more than one account on the same instance? If so then your point makes sense. Although perhaps we should call them "profiles" maybe? @rysiek @aral
@aaronwinstonsmith see work by Hans-Georg Moeller on "profilicity" @rysiek @aral
@aaronwinstonsmith @rysiek @aral 'Members' maybe? You can have 42 membership accounts
@aaronwinstonsmith @rysiek Accounts is definitely the technically correct term (and one I use in my projects also). But we should also consider whether we need absolute precision in this. For example, would “There are around 40 people on this instance” suffice while also keeping the focus on what’s important? (And/or, even better, as someone else suggested on the thread, a chance to also separate the bots: “There are around 40 people and 2 bots on this instance.”)