Convener: nigini (@nigini@social.coop)

Participants who chose to record their names here:

• Ruud (@ruud@mastodon.world)
• Tommi (@tommi@pan.rent)

Notes

Rudd: running two large servers… should servers be “that big”?

• One instance of Mastodon and one Lemmy.
• The size of the server doesn’t matter, as long as the load is distributed!!!
• It probably is: 90% of the users don’t care about the server they join!
• It would be great if we had a tool to move a whole community.

nigini: is it a problem to even use the “pick your server” as a UX.

tommi: the opposite position… I have a small community and that needs more users…

• We could create systems to decentralize.
• Maybe the server’s admin could send automatic messages… consider migrating.
• Also, how to deal with the “Threadification” of the fediverse!
• How to deal with big actors coming up?

Ruud: Threads is also an opportunity, because people are exposed to other “name@server”

• Mastodon.social agrees that their size is not ideal.
• The problem is: can you trust on the reliability of the the other servers?

nigini: reminder about LOLA proposal (better migration capabilities).

Very few people have activated federation in Threads.

• But: Threads are still not fully federate.

nigini: what are the signals that would give a good sense about the health of a server?

Rudd: size doesn’t give us that… I saw very large servers go down!

• Who runs a server? how they run a server! how to track that?
• Should we have vaults for admins (envelop procedures)
• Users side?
  • More tooling: the server has data to know what would be aligned servers to them!
  • Also, aligning on the covenants level.