Please understand that some of us are both optimistic and see wonderful potential here *and* don't want the same or similar mistakes to be made again.

There's so much experience to be drawn on, and it feels like excitement and optimism in technical protocols is pushing aside lessons. Everyone wants a better social network. There are real concerns.

For over 30 years we've seen the patterns and skills required when an individual starts an online community *regardless of protocol or software* and there are a bunch of invariants that have *nothing* to do with the skill of "administering and operating a software service". Community management is different from content moderation is different from system administration and we're *lucky* whenever a person or group happens to be good enough at all three.

The trite version of this is: Being an instance admin/starting one is much more for life than your regular co-opted pagan holiday now associated with a dominant global soft drink brand.

And the cost is if you get it wrong -- the different community management and content moderation parts -- then we collectively lose trust. Protocols won't ever fix that. They might make good management and moderation *easier* through tools, but they'll always be human decisions.

@danhon What a show. Is it really that complicated? A simplified answer is people will use what is best for them and the underlying sociological implications are usually not relevant to a typical user.
@jrg Edge cases -- your "non-typical user" -- are people.
@danhon Agreed. In the case of of the above, the conversation seems to revolve around debating whether or not a methodology of services is good or evil. That is a matter of perspective as we have all seen with this mess. Edge users will choose a corner. At least #mastodon has shown people that they do not have to be vendor locked.