Jesse"Voting with your feet" is a backstop not a first resort. The first resort should be democratic decision making. We should not accept instances where the users don't collectively have ultimate authority over policy and defederation decisions.
As long as each instance is a (hopefully benevolent) dictatorship, you can't really say this isn't feudalism. As long as users are in charge, you can't really say it is. That's the difference.
That was an atrocious construction but you know what I mean.
We need to start another fedi pact for democratic governance. And a complimentary user pact not to join another instance that is not a signatory.
Just Boby@misc Don’t YOU start.. 😩
@boby_biq lol not a defederation thing! Just trying to get some change so we aren't all at the mercy of inter admin drama.
Kyle Thayer@misc do you know of any descriptions or guides or recommendations for community run instances?
(Also, I think individually run personal instances should be exempt)
@misc also I'd like to see Fediverse projects be community-run instead of run by benevolent dictators
(and make sure it is a diverse group in charge since Mastodon leans so white)
@kylethayer The ones I know of are cosocial.ca and social.coop. My understanding is that hachyderm.io, while not fully user governed, takes care to be transparent with its rules and decision making process. I’m not aware of a guide, but I think that would be good. Certainly single user instances should be exempt - I’d even think very small ones that are effectively consensus driven. This are definitely standards that would need to evolve.
@misc Ok, this is a thread of my first pass of what a #FediGovernancePact might look like.
Anyone feel free to copy/change anything if you think there is something useful here. And if people like this (or something like it) let's try to figure out how to share and get more input (and community buy-in) on this:
#FediGovernancePact (post 1)
Goals:
- community governance of Fedi projects and instances
- make the Fediverse more welcoming
@misc #FediGovernancePact (post 2)
Why these goals?
- Community governance: having individually-run projects/instances leads to a feudalistic system, where the "benevolent dictators" duke it out over legitimate or petty conflicts. Users on those systems/servers have little say in these conflicts and may be forced to migrate servers (and only some things migrate). Also, this puts an unfair burden on the lone "benevolent dictator" to act perfectly always.
@misc #FediGovernancePact (post 3)
- make the Fediverse more welcoming: There are groups of people who have found the Fediverse unwelcoming, such as Black users, journalists, non-technical background users. We want to make this a more welcoming place for them. (note: we do **NOT** want to be welcoming to racism, transphobia, harassment, etc.). (further reading in next post):
@misc #FediGovernancePact (post 4)
- The Whiteness of Mastodon: https://techpolicy.press/the-whiteness-of-mastodon/
- Black Twitter, quoting, and white views of toxicity on Mastodon: https://privacy.thenexus.today/black-twitter-quoting-and-white-toxicity-on-mastodon/
- The Affordance Loop: https://erinkissane.com/the-affordance-loop
- Mastodon is easy and fun except when it isn’t: https://erinkissane.com/mastodon-is-easy-and-fun-except-when-it-isnt
- Some history: https://privacy.thenexus.today/mastodon-a-partial-history/#dogpiling-weaponized-content-warning-discourse-and-a-fig-leaf-for-mundane-white-supremacy
- The Whiteness of Mastodon: https://techpolicy.press/the-whiteness-of-mastodon/
- Black Twitter, quoting, and white views of toxicity on Mastodon: https://privacy.thenexus.today/black-twitter-quoting-and-white-toxicity-on-mastodon/
- The Affordance Loop: https://erinkissane.com/the-affordance-loop
- Mastodon is easy and fun except when it isn’t: https://erinkissane.com/mastodon-is-easy-and-fun-except-when-it-isnt
- Some history: https://privacy.thenexus.today/mastodon-a-partial-history/#dogpiling-weaponized-content-warning-discourse-and-a-fig-leaf-for-mundane-white-supremacy
@misc #FediGovernancePact (post 5)
How:
- To join the Pact, all instances/projects over a certain size should be community run (e.g., democracy, transparent foundation)
- TODO: define governance models
- Additionally, joining the pact means making efforts to include historically unwelcomed communities in governance (E.g., Black users, non-tech users, etc.) and keep up with the concerns of those groups.
- Make a way for users to see what servers have agreed to (and are following) the Pact
@misc #FediGovernancePact (post 6)
Examples of community governance I've seen people mention (un-vetted):
- https://cosocial.ca/
- https://hachyderm.io/
- https://digitalcourage.social/
- https://social.coop/
- https://kolectiva.social/
(Please tell me if you know of more examples, or if any of these examples are problematic and I should delete them from the list)
@misc #FediGovernancePact (post 7, final post)
This is just my first pass at thinking through a #FediGovernancePact. Feel free to copy this, modify it, and make it your own. I don't feel any need or desire to own this (it should be community owned if the Fedi community wants it!). I just want to help get the ball rolling toward better community governance.
@kylethayer This is a great thread to kick things off. Subscribed to the hashtag!
Jon@kylethayer @misc Thanks for kicking off this discussion, and apologies for the delayed response.
In terms of the #FediGovernancePact goals, let's start with #2: "make the Fediverse more welcoming". It's not clear to me how a pact of community-governed instances would make the fedivese more welcoming. Which of the issues discussed "Mastodon is easy and fun except when it isn’t" or "Whiteness of Mastodon" do you see a pact as addressing?
Goal #1 ("community governance of Fedi projects and instances") seems to reflect an assumption that more "community governance" in today's overwhelmingly white fediverse, with endemic HOA racism, is inherently a good thing. Is it? Are there examples of BIPOC people suggesting that a pact of community-governed instances would be a good course for the fediverse?
Or, look at the ongoing discussion about BBC as a test case. At least in my feed, most trans people (although certainly not all!) see BBC's history of publishing transphobic post and platforming transphobic people and groups as grounds for defederation. Most cis people (although certainly not all) see BBC's presence here as a good thing and think that defederation is a mistake. So if that's an accurate representation of people's positions in general, it's likely that "community governance" on a mostly-cis instance is likely to lead to a policy that most trans people see as anti-trans.
Of course it's possible that the cis people could listen to and prioritize trans perspectives. Unfortunately, that's not likely to be the case in today's fediverse. Look at community governenace examples like social.coop's loomio discussion about Threads or the equivalent #CoSocialMeta hashtag (both on instances you cited as good examples). There's virtually no reference to the risk to trans and queer people from the anti-LGBTQ hate groups that Meta's giving free reign to. And to tie it back to my initial point, there's also not any reference to concerns some Black people have expressed about Threads -- I've got a few exampels with links here, right after "perspectives aren't monolithic".
EDIT: Nivenly's just-announced community discussion of #Haidra is another example in progress; some initial thoughts here.
Don't get me wrong, BDFL is a very problematic model for open-source projects, and I think it's important for admins to get input from their communities. So it's certainly useful to think about different forms of community governance and the role it can play. But the discussions need to foreground anti-racism and other aspects of intersectional anti-oppression. And if you're talking about potential mechanisms for today's fediverse, it needs to take the realities of today's fediverse into account.
In terms of the #FediGovernancePact goals, let's start with #2: "make the Fediverse more welcoming". It's not clear to me how a pact of community-governed instances would make the fedivese more welcoming. Which of the issues discussed "Mastodon is easy and fun except when it isn’t" or "Whiteness of Mastodon" do you see a pact as addressing?
Goal #1 ("community governance of Fedi projects and instances") seems to reflect an assumption that more "community governance" in today's overwhelmingly white fediverse, with endemic HOA racism, is inherently a good thing. Is it? Are there examples of BIPOC people suggesting that a pact of community-governed instances would be a good course for the fediverse?
Or, look at the ongoing discussion about BBC as a test case. At least in my feed, most trans people (although certainly not all!) see BBC's history of publishing transphobic post and platforming transphobic people and groups as grounds for defederation. Most cis people (although certainly not all) see BBC's presence here as a good thing and think that defederation is a mistake. So if that's an accurate representation of people's positions in general, it's likely that "community governance" on a mostly-cis instance is likely to lead to a policy that most trans people see as anti-trans.
Of course it's possible that the cis people could listen to and prioritize trans perspectives. Unfortunately, that's not likely to be the case in today's fediverse. Look at community governenace examples like social.coop's loomio discussion about Threads or the equivalent #CoSocialMeta hashtag (both on instances you cited as good examples). There's virtually no reference to the risk to trans and queer people from the anti-LGBTQ hate groups that Meta's giving free reign to. And to tie it back to my initial point, there's also not any reference to concerns some Black people have expressed about Threads -- I've got a few exampels with links here, right after "perspectives aren't monolithic".
EDIT: Nivenly's just-announced community discussion of #Haidra is another example in progress; some initial thoughts here.
Don't get me wrong, BDFL is a very problematic model for open-source projects, and I think it's important for admins to get input from their communities. So it's certainly useful to think about different forms of community governance and the role it can play. But the discussions need to foreground anti-racism and other aspects of intersectional anti-oppression. And if you're talking about potential mechanisms for today's fediverse, it needs to take the realities of today's fediverse into account.
@jdp23 @misc
I think you are rightly calling out a tension with what I wrote.
I want community governance (to help get past BDFL/single-point-of-failure), but I am very concerned that it will just reinforce the whiteness (and other privileged perspectives) of Mastodon. That's why I tried adding a "more welcoming" piece, because I think community governance without intentionally being more welcoming would just reinforce bias and insularity.
@jdp23 @misc
I guess another way of looking at this would be something like, is my goal:
1) The Fediverse is governed by the users (though selection bias, racial bias, etc. makes this very white)
2) The Fediverse governed by everyone (even those not on it) as a common good for the world. In which case, how do non-users participate?
It's of course even more complicated than those. I want it to not be governed by racists/transphobes, but how do we get the right input and not bad inputs?
It's not a problem of gathering feedback. The largest instances, including mastodon.social, have gotten plenty of feedback that their moderation is weak and that they tolerate racism, Islamophobia, sexism, anti-Semitism, and anti-Muslim language. Eugen has had plenty of feedback that Mastodon needs to prioritize safety and the improvements that are needed -- in some cases there are even implementations that are available. The challenge is going from feedback to action.
Instead of trying to boil the ocean, a different way of looking at it is to start by focusing on what you can most easily influence. Start with your own actions. @mekkaokereke says Black people leave the fediverse "because of the behavior of the supposed "non-racist" people. The combination of extreme racism, and denial of its existence, is too much"". So some good questions to ask yourself:
-- Are you following enough Black, Indigenous, Muslim people to be aware of the extent to which extreme and "casual" (HOA-style) anti-Blackness, anti-Idigenaity, Islamophobia, and other forms of racism occur here?
-- When you see something happening, do you say or do something? Do you support others who are?
-- Do you have the skills to recognize the various forms of casual racism? Do you know how to intervene in ways that aren't counterproductive? If not there are plenty of resources out there -- for example, here are some great tips for admins and mods about Indigenous issues from @KarenWyld that apply equally well to individuals.
-- Do you boost Black, Indigenous, and Muslim voices on a variety of topics, not just racism?
-- Are you encouraging friends, acquaintances, and colleagues to do the all of the above?
You can also inflluence what happens at the instance level. A few more questions:
-- Does your instance protect marginalized people on that instance by turning on "authorized fetch" and running software that has local-only posts? If not, press your instance admin and get others to do so as well -- or if that's fruitless, move, and tell people why you're moving.
-- Does your instance enforce its moderation policies? If so, great; can you collectively help other instances do an equally-good job? If not, and the admins don't care about it, then once again again, move, and tell people why. If they want to but don't have enough moderators, then consider volunteering.
There are ways to make progress on bigger-picture stuff too -- for example Mastodon forks that's not run in a BDFL style and prioritizes anti-racism (as well as safety and community-focused instances and usability etc etc etc). But "think globally, act locally," so while we're waiting for those to take shape, there's plenty of stuff you can do.
@kylethayer @misc
Instead of trying to boil the ocean, a different way of looking at it is to start by focusing on what you can most easily influence. Start with your own actions. @mekkaokereke says Black people leave the fediverse "because of the behavior of the supposed "non-racist" people. The combination of extreme racism, and denial of its existence, is too much"". So some good questions to ask yourself:
-- Are you following enough Black, Indigenous, Muslim people to be aware of the extent to which extreme and "casual" (HOA-style) anti-Blackness, anti-Idigenaity, Islamophobia, and other forms of racism occur here?
-- When you see something happening, do you say or do something? Do you support others who are?
-- Do you have the skills to recognize the various forms of casual racism? Do you know how to intervene in ways that aren't counterproductive? If not there are plenty of resources out there -- for example, here are some great tips for admins and mods about Indigenous issues from @KarenWyld that apply equally well to individuals.
-- Do you boost Black, Indigenous, and Muslim voices on a variety of topics, not just racism?
-- Are you encouraging friends, acquaintances, and colleagues to do the all of the above?
You can also inflluence what happens at the instance level. A few more questions:
-- Does your instance protect marginalized people on that instance by turning on "authorized fetch" and running software that has local-only posts? If not, press your instance admin and get others to do so as well -- or if that's fruitless, move, and tell people why you're moving.
-- Does your instance enforce its moderation policies? If so, great; can you collectively help other instances do an equally-good job? If not, and the admins don't care about it, then once again again, move, and tell people why. If they want to but don't have enough moderators, then consider volunteering.
There are ways to make progress on bigger-picture stuff too -- for example Mastodon forks that's not run in a BDFL style and prioritizes anti-racism (as well as safety and community-focused instances and usability etc etc etc). But "think globally, act locally," so while we're waiting for those to take shape, there's plenty of stuff you can do.
@kylethayer @misc
mekka okereke :verified: (@[email protected])
@[email protected] @[email protected] If you take one thing from my little thread here it's this: Black people don't leave the fediverse because of openly racist people. Just like Black people don't leave Boston or San Francisco because of the openly racist people. There are openly racist people everywhere.🤷🏿♂️ Black people leave the fediverse, Boston, and San Francisco, because of the behavior of the supposed "non-racist" people. The combination of extreme racism, and denial of its existence, is too much.
@jdp23 @KarenWyld @mekkaokereke @misc that's a great list of things to do! Thanks for putting that together!
Glad it's useful! Also the same approach applies in other dimensions as well as racism. For example, @welshpixie just posted The Toxic Manosphere of Fedi, describing some extreme misogyny. How much of this two-month long sequence of harassment did you see? If you saw any of it, did you take the harasser's word for what was happening, or did you support the people who intervened?
[Sprry for the repeated posts on this, "delete and edit" didn't work the way I expected on Hajkey. Oops!]
@kylethayer @misc
[Sprry for the repeated posts on this, "delete and edit" didn't work the way I expected on Hajkey. Oops!]
@kylethayer @misc
@jdp23 @kylethayer Thanks for this thoughtful response. I have some thoughts but I'm gonna follow your example and marinate on it a bit before I get back to you. ;)
@jdp23 @kylethayer Ok, as promised, my thoughts. This is going to be a long thread, so I’m going to untag you both and make the rest of this unlisted.
I agree with you both that it’s vital to view these questions of governance through the lens of intersectionality, and to center the well being of people who are marginalized and oppressed in our society. Not just as an aside, or as window dressing, but as integral to our thinking and work. (1/14?)
“Perspectives aren’t monolithic” indeed, and we should be careful about speaking broadly on behalf of groups, especially ones that we don’t belong to. And also, about the assumptions we make in general… (2/14)
Before going on, I want to mention something or it’s gonna bother me: I’m mixed race. Also …not sure I consider myself totally cis, exactly? I realize people see me as a white dude for the most part, so I’m rolling with it for the purpose of this discussion. It’s true enough, in the ways most salient here. And yet, when I perceive that mirrored back at me, it feels a bit like erasure, and… doesn’t feel great! IDK, no request here, & not sure what to do, other than name it. Anyway, onward! (3/14)
BIPOC, trans folks, women, disabled people… are whole people. They’re not just their oppressions, and their interests go beyond not being harassed. Yes, their safety should be our top priority. But we also have to think about how to make the fediverse more congenial in general. Because tbh, in my extremely limited unscientific anecdotal observation, when I’ve seen people in these groups grow weary of the fedi, it often hasn’t been primarily because of targeted harassment. (4/14)
At this point, in my provisional mental model (*extremely* subject to change) there are two main reasons the fediverse doesn’t look like the rest of the world, and that it pushes away people who don’t look like it does presently. One is lack of safety. But the other is an insular, alienating culture. (I would put “HOA racism” somewhere in between those two poles.) (5/14)
ophiocephalic 🐍@kylethayer @misc
This is interesting. We're thinking along similar lines over here. We think the best way to insure a democratic fediverse culture would be to instill an ethos which deliberately keeps instances small enough to scale democracy and human-centered community and moderation. Here's a post of mine from earlier today which sketches out some ideas:
ophiocephalic 🐍 (@[email protected])
A Free Fediverse beyond surveillance capitalism should prioritize deepening its commitment to decentralization by keeping the maximum user count of its instances small. This addresses practical needs. Smaller communities are easier to moderate, on a human scale which doesn't involve algorithms or invasive third-party data collection. Smaller communities disperse targets for threat models like spambots, and enhance network resilience. And smaller communities are better at scaling democracy, so that we can avoid being pulled back into the circumstance now plaguing the fediverse of mega-server admins unilaterally imposing their will on everyone else. However, keeping things small can result in problems of its own. Smaller communities means more people grappling with the complexities of trying to set up, administer, moderate, and - not to mention - *fund* operations. A system of mutual aid, beyond the current haphazard status quo, is required. As an approach to solving these problems, and to instilling a ethos of solidarity devoid of the for-profit "monetization" impulse, consider the concept of the fedifam. :fediverso: 👩👩👧 🧵 1/4 #FreeFediverse #FediPact #FediblockMeta #DefederateMeta #Meta #Facebook #Threads #Democracy #Decentralization #Prefiguration #Fedifam
elle mundy@misc at first i thought this was about moving states vs voting in elections, and i was about to respond “some people vote with their feet when they stand on line at the polling place all day”
@exchgr I mean, I'm definitely using that analogy to try and make sense of our situation here! Everything should be easier - at least minimally painful - including voting, and including the backstop of emigrating altogether.
@misc seems like it would be so much less of an issue if people could migrate their posts along with their accounts
@exchgr Yeah... there are issues that need to be ironed out but I agree. (I also think a pretty and easy way to publicly memorialize your post history across networks, including Twitter, might be even better for most people?)
@misc like a post archive host or something? or even just internet archive?
@exchgr The former. I think there should be a site where you can sign up for an account, one click upload of your archives from Twitter, Mastodon, or wherever, and it displays them with pretty styling, and searchability if you choose. And the software running all this should be open source, so you can export your archival account *itself* and take it to another web host at will.
@misc having trouble finding it now but i could’ve sworn something like this existed
@exchgr The prior art I can think of is @darius’s Twitter archiver https://tinysubversions.com/twitter-archive/make-your-own/ and @manton’s lovely but discontinued Watermark.io.
Ben@misc that too is not a decision that needs to be made globally. Say the instance is a university and the users the students. Why shouldn’t the university investing the resources make some decisions? This dilemma is even clearer when you offer an instance to the public and get overrun by trolls.
Nothing wrong with people picking Democratic instances either. And there is a big big grey area of just figuring stuff out and finding solutions on a case by case level.
@b3n Of course there is no authority forcing anything - but I think that people “voting with their feet” have the capacity to make “feudal” instances no longer the norm, and that would be *extremely* healthy for the ecosystem.
FeralRobots@misc also holds IRL.
@FeralRobots Indeed!