@aral @Gargron Actually, when combining this decision with the recent trademark one of not allowing other instances to be named *.mastodon.* there might be a case for questioning Gargron's motives here.

... but I think this is the right move to enable frictionless signups. However, it's now critically important to implement the one-click _complete_ account migration between servers as well.

Basically mastodon.social needs to encourage users to move on from spawn.

#Mastodon

@troed @aral @Gargron I agree. Though as nefarious as both those decisions can appear, I think it's clearly about trying to reduce the friction for new users - even for the trademark changes. The biggest complaints during November last year were about picking servers and people ending up on 'mastodon' urls that aren't moderated.

So I can empathize with the intention here.

@Nour @troed @aral @Gargron To be fair, we have seen Matrix’s main server end up fairly full as a result.

Maybe a more @pixelfed approach would be better? Main server is the first option but other options aren’t behind a secondary action.

@BenjaminNelan @Nour @troed @aral @Gargron @pixelfed why even elect (and prefer) a "main" server? Why not rotate the network behind the sign-up button?

I agree reducing friction for signing up is a good thing, but why limit it to one instance. There are plenty options big enough that a new user doesn't immediately feel lost.

You could even select instances by language setting and default display local timeline for new users with no/few followings, so they see activity.