@film_girl My biggest problem with this is a lot of admins are de-federating servers without providing evidence of a legitimate rule that the server violated. Every admin should define consistent rules for their server, and enforce those rules (and only those rules).

The lack of transparency and lack of following their own stated rules, is the disappointing part.

@jonasnuts @fishcharlie @film_girl

As an admin of an instance to whom you've already addressed this critique, there's a few things to say. Your caricature of what admins believe doesn't help any clear debate, so let's clear up a couple of points.

As a former corporate telco middle manager, you surely respect that a product owner's vision is what drives a project -- not the yells of people who are not using, and clearly will never use, your platform. I can't imagine your former employer suspending an ongoing code sprint because someone is complaining about typos in the ToS.

I'm constantly surprised to see high expectations towards volunteer initiatives, contrasted with a different, more permissive position towards companies. Things become a lot simpler if, instead of framing instance admins as rulers or governments, one frames them as an executive team (CEO, CTO, etc) and an instance's users as its shareholders.

As for the clear expectation that admins of instances that you're not a part of should somehow reflect your idea of what the fediverse ought to become, constant provocation seems like a futile effort. One can set up an instance for 5€/mo, it's really a matter of putting your money where your mouth is -- I would be interested to see what kind of rules and terms you have in mind to address your concerns.