Comment on Mastodon Exit Interview
rglullis@communick.news 1 week agoWe do like get stuck in a loop, no?
The point is that we are expecting newcomers to get a crash course on how Mastodon does content discovery and the dynamics of federation just to set up a completely harmless fleet of bots.
Then, when OP has the absolutely natural reaction of saying “look, this seems completely broken, I don’t care about these things you are asking and therefore I will just go play somewhere else”, we attack the messenger and his character instead of listening to the criticism and seeing where we could’ve done better.
db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
I am not going to argue this point. My only point in this discussion is that one can safely self-host bots with a reasonable output and have little chance of being widely defederated.
rglullis@communick.news 1 week ago
And I am not arguing “everyone will defederate from instances running bots”.
My argument is that admins see any “unwanted” activity and try to squash it on the grounds of “abusing the resources set up for the community”, instead of realizing that the it was the community’s interest in the service provided by the bots that was causing the excessive activity in the first place.
db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
This is exactly what you were arguing. There’s no reason to bring up alien.top otherwise.
rglullis@communick.news 1 week ago
Wait, not only are you misinterpreting what I said (I used alien.top as a case of for “admins will want to defederate because of resource abuse even when their own users find it useful” and less about “admins will ban any bot-only instance”) but your interpretation directly contradicts your first point.
Yeah, you can add the “reasonable output” qualifier all you want. This would be a subjective point. I for one think that a fleet of 98 bots posting each once a day is not even worth of consideration, but clearly some disagree and are willing to treat they guy as “toxic”.