🧵 Thread 1/3. What about making Mastodon an invite-only platform. This would mean each member can invite others, but there's a twist: invitees' profiles link back to their inviter. #Mastodon#InviteOnly#CommunityTrust#mastoadmin#fediverse
@hirad The control ultimately lies with the user. Consider a hypothetical spammer, "John," who requires numerous accounts to execute an attack, as we've observed in recent weeks. With the proposed system, if the ability to block extends to an entire referral tree, then any malicious activity could be traced back to a central node like John's.
@hirad This doesn't indiscriminately punish everyone in the tree but provides a targeted and effective means to halt widespread abuse. By focusing on the root of the problem, we can prevent the spread of harmful behavior while minimizing collateral damage.
@hirad
It is also incorporating social responsibility into the very fabric of the network's design. By establishing a system where each user's actions can have consequences for their entire referral tree, it encourages a culture of mindfulness and accountability.
@hirad This approach closely mirrors real-world social dynamics, where our networks expand through introductions from existing connections rather than random encounters with strangers.
@igisho@hirad actually no, just go see how kids make friends in a playground (even when they don't share a language), and how it's still done well into adulthood both via physical bonding by virtue of being in the same space, and also via apps. I think this is a reductive way of describing human bonding, especially on the fringes of what is considered normal and accepted, which would be excluded by default by this approach.
@ncrav@hirad you are for sure right, it is reductive. Also social networks “normal” way of bonding is reductive. My proposal is just to add another layer which gives users another options.
@ncrav@hirad if I get it correctly your point is that this might inadvertently exclude those on the fringes or those who thrive in less structured environments.
It now does matter if you consider the rest of proposed functionality as beneficial, since than we can discuss how to make it more inclusive.
@igisho@hirad it is exclusionary on different kinds of people:
people who have been uprooted from their usual social network, due to life events or even things like gender identity
people whose friend network does not take part in this kind of stuff, happens a lot in small towns, remote places, etc. it's especially hard if they don't feel entirely comfortable in English/etc and as such communicate mostly within their linguistic group.
...continues...
@igisho@hirad - people with social disabilities that might not have a proper friend group even online, but that might want to lurk socials and eventually even communicate
There are probably a bunch of other groups I'm forgetting/don't know about ,especially since excluded groups/people tend by their very nature to be invisible until we contact with someone there. In a social network it's always hard to find the solo/lightly interacting nodes.
...continues...
@igisho@hirad In terms of solution, I think invitations are like job references, it's great when you're part of a group that has access to them. But how do we even make things known to people outside those networks, while protecting the network from spam? Is it lack of knowledge of some admins? Perhaps better intro/docs/defaults. Is it the use of temporary mails? Is the lack of automated mechanisms for coordination? I understand that it might be harder to be both secure and inclusive.
@ncrav@hirad we might introduce “spectator” mode for users without sponsor. They will have limited options to interact but they will be able to find sponsor directly in the network. Security and inclusivity is indeed little problem. But you introduced fantastic points to this discussion 🙏 I guess I can’t speculate more without any data anymore 😅
@igisho@hirad in this regard there is a similar precedent in at least some wikis (e.g. alpine https://wiki.alpinelinux.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter ): people may contribute, but e.g. new users cannot add links. Perhaps something like this but adapted to our use case would make it unprofitable/unfun to mess with the network.
Add comment