For all users, it's worth checking out the mastodon.social content moderation guidelines, at https://mastodon.social/about/more
As @sonya points out, not everyone may be happy with them.
As our host @Gargron point out, if you don't like them, you can run your own instance.
But instances choose who they peer with... so the Mastodon-based network may balkanize.
I'm starting to think that the right use-case for Mastodon is not as a Twitter alternative (long-term public presence) but as a Slack alternative (private and often short-lived discussion groups, or organizational intranet).
A group is motivated to pay for its own instance so long as it is useful... Who is motivated to operate one as a public service, with years-long commitment?
@puellavulnerata I think this OUGHT to have been the model for the whole web all along. It was the original model (Xanadu). It's the right thing.
But almost no one has succeeded because (1) the hassle of signing up for zillions of separate services is too great and (2) everyone got used to "the web is free" and thinks it's a moral affront to be asked to pay for it.
@Meaningness @puellavulnerata
> everyone got used to "the web is free" and thinks it's a moral affront to be asked to pay for it.
IMO this is the wrong way of thinking about it. It's more that if someone can be offered for free and monetized through advertising, it will be, and social networking needs super low friction to scale.