Hello people interested in a decentralised Fediverse, would like some feedback on something 馃檹
At the moment, Fedi.Garden only lists Fediverse servers with fewer than 50,000 registered members. I am wondering if this limit should be replaced by a limit based on active members rather than registered members?
If a server has had a lot of signups in the past but not many active now, it is perhaps unfairly shut out of Fedi.Garden even though it now needs help getting noticed?
Any thoughts?
why not both?
Once I did a similar thing for diaspora* and I just made a score for every instance. You could just imagine some kind of formula regarding both measurements.
for example:
(registered users on instance / sum of registered users on all known instances) x (active users on instance / sum of all active users on all known instances) = score
every instance scoring under 0.1 (or 0.05) gets into the list.
Or the lowest 50
Or the lowest 30%
whatever suits you.
Active members is a more meaningful metric.
But at the same time, we should be encouraging instance admins to have some sort of published policy for removing "dead" accounts. Some do, I know.
Yes, I think it fair to replace the limit based on active members, and add moderated registration as an improvement to the list. Thank you for asking.
@FediGarden active members sounds good
@FediGarden great idea!
I'll add that even the registration type should be considered, because with a server with open registrations, chances are that many of those <50.000 users are spambots (the Fedichick, etc.)
Moderated registrations? No spambots on my watch.
@FediGarden I'd say so, yeah.
@FediGarden My two cents:
p.s. This came to mind due to the supergiant mastodon.social which is sucking up all the active members at an unprecedented rate.
Even servers considered large now only have a tiny fraction of the active members of mastodon.social.
@FediGarden Servers with too many active members are the problem for mods all over the Fediverse, so yeah, I'd say active members makes more sense as a limit. 2000 active members is enough.
It would make it easier to add or remove servers from the list based on how they are now.
The way it would practically change the list depends on what the active member limit is set to.
The active numbers are now just so much higher on mastodon.social than on any other server, usually dozens and sometimes even hundreds or thousands of times higher. It feels like main aim now should be to get people off mastodon.social as all other servers are now much smaller than it.
