:blobwizard: Tsatnosk is a user on manowar.social. You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse.
:blobwizard: Tsatnosk @zatnosk

: putting social federation in the fediverse.
Currently the fediverse is only a federation of technology. The software use agreed upon protocols to operate in conjunction with each other, but the people don't.
Each instance can be seen as a silo in the social sense, because all admin work and moderation work is handled by a small appointed-by-the-founder team.

What if we seperated the moderation from the administration, and made the moderation federal?

One or more instances form a moderation cluster.
Each cluster have a set of minimum rules that each member-instance has agreed to follow. These rules should ideally be determined and changed democratically.
Each instance is still responsible for day-to-day moderation, but any user (in-cluster or out-cluster) can be accused of breaking the cluster-rules, and a jury of moderators can silence/ban/etc as fit.
Each instance in the cluster would follow rulings automatically.

any instance could choose to overrule any rulings, but should do so publically (or at least visible to the jury), and any instance should be free to leave the cluster without fear of punishment.

@zatnosk how would you handle inter-cluster conflict?

@aeonofdiscord by diplomacy between cluster-moderators. Any one instance wouldn't be confined to join just one cluster.
It's meant as an upgraded, transparent and democratic replacement for shared white-/blacklisting.

@aeonofdiscord mostly I just want to untie community moderation from instance admins. Hopefully in the future, we can have primarily single-person-instances, that cooperate to protect themselves and each other against bad actors.

@zatnosk I've yet to be convinced that single-user instances scale well, it seems inefficient

@aeonofdiscord inefficient from what perspective? Personal computers scale pretty well.
The trick is making it sufficiently stable and outsourcing maintainance/repair - like we do with most home appliances and personal computers.

@zatnosk like:

imagine a masto user with 1000 followers, each on their own instance

when they push out a status update, their instance has to contact each of those 1000 other instances, which each make one copy of the data

that's a lot more redundant storage across the network as a whole than if their followers are split over 20-30 instances

@aeonofdiscord using that argument, we might as well jump in the silos and save a lot of storage.
Maybe there's an ideal instance size somewhere between 100-1000 accounts, but I don't think storage is a problem in a fully decentralized ecosystem - assuming you only save what's relevant to you, and not every single meme-video that's posted in the last three years.

@zatnosk It's a tradeoff. 100-1000 users is basically my (mostly uninformed) guess at the optimal instance size as well.

Also not everybody has the resources to run an instance; remember that a lot of the world only sees the internet through a smartphone. I think the network needs to be able to accommodate a variety of use cases, there's no one-size-fits-all

@aeonofdiscord true, we probably wont be able to reach "one-instance-per-child" with federation-like infrastructure.
But we might be able to make hybrids, where each person functionally has their own private instance, but they're hosted in groups - i.e. no bleedover in visibility, no serverwide moderation, etc.
In that scenario, actually administrating the hardware and software becomes wholly seperate from moderation and community. And ideally instances could jump servers.

@zatnosk I'd definitely like to move towards a more federated system but I think it'll need careful planning and a lot of work

@aeonofdiscord the "a lot of work" is indisputable, and you're probably right on the careful planning part too.
Currently I'm airing out my ideas while writing them down, to see what's attractive and rational when I get time to work on it at a later point.
And if I inspire someone in the process, awesome!

@zatnosk admins value the ability to set their own standards and run their communities accordingly; I'm not sure they'd see any benefit in giving that up

@aeonofdiscord those admins can rule their own little kingdoms if they want. I won't force anyone to operate democratically, but I'm sure as hell going to advocate for it.