Seeing some push back here on the idea of confusing things with more terms than just "fediverse". I get that. The problem is that that cat is very much out of the bag. Surely, for the vast majority of people that have any awareness of the fediverse, they think it's just Mastodon.

Either way, "Mastodon" is a much larger "brand" than "fediverse" or anything else on the fediverse. So trying to get some conceptual branding going makes sense. It make things more clear, as the idea of the fediverse itself is kinda fuzzy and complex and probably best left out at the beginning. It's a little bit like the matrix, you have to see it with your own eyes, IMO.

So, my lame contribution ...

Threadiverse!: "Social media, but woven into threads, like Reddit or Forums, not like the chaos of Twitter, but all on the Fediverse so you can find anyone else doing anything else too."

Why should we just accept that some naïve twitter refugees have misassociated the Fediverse as being just Mastodon? This isn't branding, this is raising awareness of the interrelatedness of this federated network! Disassociating from the Fediverse just makes the problem worse, I'd say.

I get you. In the end, for me, and I settled on this a while ago. "Fediverse" is a bad name. It's confusing, seems like a Marvel thing, sounds weird and even unappealing frankly. Mastodon works because it's a cool appealing word. It's not just twitter refugees and their ignorance. The "fediverse" has a marketing/branding problem. And if you want "refugees" or "migrants" (which I acknowledge are problematic terms for actual IRL refugees, sorry), you've got meet them where they are.

Additionally, platforms are actually products. In fact, relatively vertical products with often sub-par interoperability for something that claims to be the "next internet protocol". So, whether you create some branding or not, "you", as a platform, are putting branding out there even if it's the absence of an attempt.

So my recommended approach would be to happily "brand" a platform, but always be pushing and clarifying that it's on the fediverse and what that actually means. Also, I'd start talking about "the social web" rather than just the fediverse, because that's what it is and it's a better term IMO.

I don't know that I agree that just being heavy with product branding and trying to list interoperability as a feature really addresses the issue, but I 100% agree that "Fediverse" is an awful name.

But then, so is "world wide web". Or "Internet", for they matter. We get stuck with so many awful, awful names that sound like they were the idea of villains from a low budget 90s sci-fi tv show.