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).
@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.
@aaronwinstonsmith @rysiek @aral
Also bots, aren't people, but they may still have an account 8-)
@aral i've long railed about calling people "resources" - and i think you're right about calling them users as well.
i'll try to change.
@aral Tron fights for the people doesn't quite have the same ring to it though 😁
I like this, how about folk? It's the same number of characters.
@[email protected] @[email protected] 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.”)
always found the notion of 'user' disempowering at best, classist at worst. it usually comes from techno-elitist jargon. 'users' are opposed to those who see themselves as the true masters: the developpers, the admins... who often don't realize they're dispensible, usually in the ocket of some owner, investor, etc...
so yay! power to the #fediverse (and other) 'people'!
@[email protected] @[email protected] 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.”)
@[email protected] that'd fit nicely with the ability mark an account as a bot or not. "There are 41 people on this instance, and 1 bot"
@aral
I am vociferously opposed to the idea that developers and designers - especially the ones working on Open Source projects - apply the name user as a vehicle for patronization. People who interact with technology are users, them acting in that specific role in that specific context doesn't make them any less peopl-y. The same applies to employees, consumers, etc.
Ranting against these context specific terminologies just looks like wilful antagonism.
@MaxGuthier
I was going to reply with something similar, and it was fascinating to see the geek historian elsewhere in the thread point out that 'users' came into digital networks from libraries, not generally known as misanthropic projects. I think it's perfectly fine to talk about 'users' in dev discussions where a user isn't necessarily a human at all (could be another piece of software).
Having said that, @aral has a point. In many contexts 'people' (or 'fedizens') is a better choice.
Oh, yes, certainly there is a point. If we talk about the human interactions in the fediverse, certainly we are taking about people. Only if we speak about the adoption and utilization of technology is the term 'user' relevant.
One of the many boons of the #fediverse is that the technological client and the digital society are independent from each other.
@aral As an aside - when you mentioned the number 42: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrases_from_The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy#The_Answer_to_the_Ultimate_Question_of_Life,_the_Universe,_and_Everything_is_42
🙂
@aral @ParadeGrotesque while I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, I think it’s important to acknowledge where the term “user” came from, which, really, is libraries.
Telephones had subscribers, but libraries had users. That same terminology spread to early software systems. So I think in an important way, these big corps have abused the term “user” significantly. Their “users” are really their product.
Fletcher 🏳️⚧️
Aral Balkan
Michał "rysiek" Woźniak · 🇺🇦
Aaron Winston Smith
Oblomov
Kou Ki
Envy
Hudda Ahmed
Tomas Ekeli
RandomDude
Quantum
Arden (she/her)
funkypenguin
tk 🍜
Ralf Rottmann
Owen Niblock
Heike Naumann
Artur Weigandt
Salino
Spike Smolders (she/they)
Josje Toorop
Alexandre Oliva (moved to @
Raul Portales
Aussie
Jérémie Zimmermann🎶💗🧀🫖5946
Johann150 ⁂ 
☮
🇨🇦 Steve
Max Guthier
Strypey
Jakub
Mark Newton
Mike Gerow
Koubik
Gorobar
ronconsoda
Gareth Kitchen
Shaun Haney (FroggyJS)
Shine