Mr RowntreeNov 5, 2022
stux⚡️

Someone just came to me with an idea and I kinda like it and are willing to do it but I want your opinion first!  

Many people are following the 'famous' from Twitter to Mastodon but are having a hard time finding them..

I just bought the domain 'officials.social' and I could setup and invite only instance for more 'high profile' people so to say so everyone can more easily find them?

Before I proceed I like your input❤️

Go for it
46.8%
No, bad choice
28.4%
I don't care
24.8%
Poll ended at .
Nov 5, 2022 at 10:32pmWeb
Show threadStefan Midjich ꙮ҄Nov 5, 2022
@stux naw you'll never convince everyone to register on your instance. it's like herding cats. easier to just have a directory just like we already do on several sites.
Show threadstux⚡️Nov 5, 2022

@stemid I know!   but a few would do already  

Only for those who feel the need

Show threadStefan Midjich ꙮ҄Nov 5, 2022
@stux use officials.social to setup a static site directory for high profile accounts instead. so we have one link to send people who are looking for these accounts. that way the high profile people still have the freedom to pick their own instance, but we can find them.
Show threadJan EdenNov 5, 2022
@stemid @stux Second that.
Show threadBryson Shepard 🌱🌻Nov 5, 2022
@stemid @stux yea I'm thinking this would be a good idea as well.
Show threadRich BaylissNov 5, 2022

@stemid @stux this ☝️

To my very limited understanding, we should have more instances and the instances should be linked to the peoples domains. This is the best form of trust possible.

Sharing a directory of official big-name instances and people is a great idea while the #fediverse takes off.

Show threadAV 🇺🇦Nov 5, 2022
@stux ooooh, very interesting idea because that's really the question I've been having so far, not necessarily for VIPs but about publications and brands. So far it seems people (if any) have been setting up shop in the bigger/Masto-named instances
https://bbq.snoot.com/@antovolk/109290213540703421
AV 🇺🇦 (@[email protected])

morning question to the wider #fediverse - do people on here want to see news outlets/brands join, and so how? [ ] Yes - join the server I'm on [ ] Yes - join one of big servers (eg mastodon.social) [ ] Yes - create own brand server [ ] Noooooooooooo - stay off here that ruined Birdsite

The Snoot BBQ
Show threadAV 🇺🇦Nov 5, 2022
@stux but also worth flagging at the same time that'd be essentially a replication of the Verified check dynamic - which might be good/necessary is this is to become somewhere brands/VIPs migrate?
Show threadAV 🇺🇦Nov 5, 2022
@stux suggestion in my linked poll/convo does seem to lean towards brands making their own instances but that's an additional hurdle for discovery (and from a corporate pov, actually managing the hosting...) so maybe this is an in between that could genuinely work. And if people don't want high profile folks or brands in their federated servers they can just mute/defederate
Show threadlampNov 5, 2022
@stux an _invite-only_ instance for known VIP's might not be a terrible idea. 🤔
Show threadDan moved, see pinned tootNov 5, 2022
@stux Good god yes please concentrate the celebrities into one easily-ignorable server
Show threadShaneNov 5, 2022
@stux Let them be found like everyone else!
Show threadRoelant Siekman🌱⚡️Nov 5, 2022
@stux a primus inter paris server? I have some reservations about this..
Show threadMicahNov 5, 2022
@stux would also provide a sort of verification
Show threadfunkypenguinNov 5, 2022
@stux feels like a bad idea TBH. How about a GitHub pages-based list (like the awesome lists), updated via PRs for transparency?
Show threadjenny met een eiNov 5, 2022
@stux not sure about this, i like the lack of hierarchy on here
Show threadcolapunkNov 5, 2022
@jennymeteenei @stux yeah, this. I like this moment of not having bigwigs yet, tbh. They'll arise, it might be the same as on twitter, it might not..
Show threadGreub 🐑Nov 5, 2022
@stux I guess it depends on what 'famous' people are. If it's famous twitter accounts then I'd say no. If it's 'famous' people outside of social networks then why not? But those people will be found on the #fediverse eventually no?
Show threadhalvaNov 5, 2022
@stux how high is "high-profile" though? like, stephen king and popular brands "high-profile" or fairly niche internet celebrities "high-profile"?
Show threadAlex GizisNov 5, 2022
@stux I can speak for all the people of fedeverse when i say it depends on whether @AlexGizis is “high profile” or not. If not, it’s a terrible idea. (No seriously, it’s a terrible idea, attempting to create the blue check mark caste system if twitter)
Show threadAstrobach Nov 5, 2022
@AlexGizis @stux I think the issue it's addressing is that famous people are more likely to get stalkers and trolls that imitate them and could potentially ruin their career. I know Ellen for Outside Xtra was making that point on twitter and it was her motivation to get the blue check.
Show threadAlex GizisNov 5, 2022
@rorystarr @stux A lot of the lists of "what needs to be fixed in mastodon" have the ease of jumping to another server and creating a fake clone of people from other servers. I think it's real issue, that's going to hit not famous people.
Show threadAstrobach Nov 5, 2022

@AlexGizis @stux That is entirely possible. But for most people, they are not interested in compromising their privacy and anonymity to forestall that generally uncommon scenario.

Famous people have no real option for anonymity as it is and are much more likely to be subject of such trolling. I wouldn't preclude other options for people to confirm who they are, but I don't think any of that is case against famous people dealing with a clear and present issue.

Show threadAlex GizisNov 5, 2022
@rorystarr @stux Interesting... @stux's original question seemed to make it about us finding them. But I can imagine a high-security instance
Show threadAstrobach Nov 5, 2022

@AlexGizis @stux The original message does focus on that. I think stux misinterprets the value that famous people find in the checkmark though. I mean, I'm not famous, obv, but from the famous people I have seen discuss the issue, the check is more about defending themselves from trolls.

Keeping in mind a lot of people are not rich and famous, just famous. Like, yeah I'm sure brad pitt will be fine, but mid range youtubers have less resources to protect themselves, but all the visibility.

Show threadn3wjackNov 5, 2022
@stux don't forget to charge €8 though 😏
Show threadMaarten den BraberNov 5, 2022
@stux only if you're ready to do the credential checking / vetting too. I would present it as a temporary solution and also help them with a more permanent path after that
Show threadstux⚡️Nov 5, 2022

@mdbraber Indeed, something like that OR a valid verfiied link back to Masto

I can help with that proccess since it's not that many people

Plus, if someone would help with that, that would be awesome 

Show threadRyan StraussNov 5, 2022
@stux Sounds like a good idea. I'm personally looking for credible news sources vs "celebs" but I think it could work for both well.
Show threadcolapunkNov 5, 2022
@ryanstrauss @stux let the news sources just host on their own domain. @[email protected] would be so logical..
Show threadQuantumNov 5, 2022
@stux No not another instance. You are having trouble enough paying the hosting service for your current ones. And others are already starting this kind of instances. I saw one for journalists. Sorry, i forgot the exact domain.
Show threadFabian【ファビアン】🏳️‍🌈Nov 5, 2022
@stux I don't see how I would find someone easier that way.
Show threadRalf RottmannNov 5, 2022
@stux I had a very similar idea: Offering an instance where people are verified according to a well documented and fully transparent process, e.g. by Photo ID, etc. Of course, it won't be about paying for verification. The instance would effectively signal: The team has seen the Photo ID (and probably other means) and can attest for the identity. -- All of these ideas boil down to the question, whether there's a case for special *purpose* instances as opposed to special
Show threadRalf RottmannNov 5, 2022
@stux *interest* instances. Another example could be verified.press. On the other hand, if we create more instances that potentially grow to very large user bases, it is a bit against the idea of having a vastly federated landscape.
Show threadJavier AlvarezNov 5, 2022
@ralf @stux official government accounts could be a thing. A way to establish the account as a verified source of information?
Show threadA PersonNov 5, 2022
@jmangt @ralf @stux I think its up to .gov IT admins to create those official instances.
Show threadAdministratörenNov 5, 2022
@stux Not sure I like the idea, have to think about it.
Show threadJaxNov 5, 2022
@stux a lot of people are famous for being famous and I see this place as a leveller, I don't think this would be a good move. Already seen people chasing numbers and I don't think it's a healthy way to go.
Show threadHeurismNov 5, 2022
@Liveotherwise @stux Lets not cater to the internet famous
Show threadAmanda Finley Digs All ThingsNov 6, 2022
@Liveotherwise @stux I agree. Valid. My only concern is in people faking accounts.
Show threadFlying Yogini Nov 5, 2022
@stux honestly don’t dig. Would love to have improvements to search function to find people and a way that our user names can only be used by one person. Those seem bigger priorities
Show threadA PersonNov 5, 2022

@flyingyogini @stux As far as I understand, the decentralized design makes it so that no one can ensure a unique username across instances. Someone can always spin up a new instance to create, e.g., [email protected]

"It's like email" 🤷

Show threadFlying Yogini Nov 6, 2022
@aperson @stux interesting. 🙃
Show threadBlogfeedserNov 5, 2022
@stux Perhaps you could charge them €7 a month. Ka-ching! 😄
Show threadLuke Chadwick 🧑‍💻Nov 5, 2022

@stux not sure about the domain exactly but it is important for high-profile people either celebrities or government officials to be findable.

I saw someone suggesting a NY Times instance and I think that's a good step. Each big media company and government has their own instance.

Show threadReid  Nov 6, 2022
@vertis @stux the European Union already has an instance of their own, if you ask me there's no reason why governments and big organisations like NY Times ans the like couldn't have their own instances on their own domains
Show threadLuke Chadwick 🧑‍💻Nov 6, 2022

@Reiddragon @stux it could still be a nice temporary measure while they slow move through corporate/government projects to get setup.

Unfortunately easy for me to also create even-moar-official.social

Show threadThe Duality of XanNov 5, 2022
@stux David Bowie quite famously used to have an incognito account on Tumblr so he could laugh at the memes people were making of him, and I feel like more high profile people should follow his example.
Show threadJason StilesNov 5, 2022
@stux I am rather new so maybe I am missing something but how would having these folks on their own instance help me find them? Can you browse a list of users on an instance? I don’t see that ability. It seems like some sort of directory would be a good idea though.
Show threadJohn DellaportaNov 5, 2022
@stux this would certainly solve for a lot of concern about duplicated handles, plus provide a kind of individualized vetting that would be desirable for some of the more cautious, vulnerable folks
Show threadJohn DellaportaNov 5, 2022
@johndellaporta @stux As someone else mentioned here, I could also see highly searchable individual instances (“verified.film”, “verified.press”, “verified.govt”) being a very helpful tool for users, in addition to a protective vetting process for those wishing to do “official” work through their social accounts or at high risk of imitation
Show threadChristopherNov 5, 2022
@stux
Honestly, we should be encouraging them - especially if they have their own domains - to set up their own fedi servers. [email protected] is better for them and the network in the long run.
Show threadyuhline Nov 5, 2022
@stux I like the idea. I think it makes it easier for us to find the content we had before too.
Show threadalexbNov 5, 2022
Make sure to only charge $7 a month to be on it though ;)
Show threadrealcaseyrollins ✝️Nov 5, 2022
@stux I was actually thinking of a similar idea and was telling @Marbleturtle about it while raking leaves. Perhaps maybe invite-only would be too exclusive, you'd have a hard time getting the invites to the celebrities IMHO. But you could allow sign-up submissions that must be approved, and vet out the requests one by one.

There used to be an instance like this called verified.af, but they shut down for some reason.
Show threadTracy HallNov 5, 2022
@stux simply put, you do not want that headache - all you will get is grief over who you do and who you *don't* invite/list.
Show threadLarry Nov 5, 2022
@stux you could also charge them $7.99 for the verification, cheaper than Twitter! 😉
Show threadrealcaseyrollins ✝️Nov 5, 2022
@Lsquare28 @stux LOL! 😂

#Mastodon doesn't have an official account verification system, does it? I do know that #Soapbox does.

It also happens to have an account label feature, similar to what #ElonMusk plans to use for the accounts of politicians and whatnot.

The #Fediverse is ahead.
Show threadJohn FrancisNov 5, 2022
@stux let's see if they stay famous on merit, without the privilege of commercially motivated amplification. No need for a privileged instance.
Show threadGrant 🇺🇦ArmUkraine🇺🇦Nov 5, 2022
@stux It might be cooler to use the domain as a list for accounts. People could search by real name and find the @ address and instance they're on. Like an old-timey phone book. :)