There are migration tools to move your followers and your followings between nodes. But no way to move your posts. And so, yes, your identity partially/kind-of doesn't move. But mostly sort of does?

At first this bugged me, but then it was pointed out that if you could just move your posts you could also potentially violate the moderation rules of the host you were moving to. So it makes some sense.

Thanks. I am more worried about the identity than the posts. If my identity belongs to the host, then in that sense this is no better than a centralized Twitter. Just theoretically speaking (I have not been banned from anything ever), if a mastodon.art user is banned from mastodon.art - everyone who followed them will have to find them on another instance and subscribe again? If exporting data is a process that depends on the host instance, when they ban you - that's it, your identity is not recoverable.

The migration tool automatically moves your followers. It's a bit janky, it took an hour or two for it do its thing for me (there must be some batch component, I dunno). I don't know how it works between banned instances, or what your options are for when a server goes down fully.

But all the of the follower/following data is available via CSV export any time, too. And there's obviously an open API as well.

And honestly, you could also just run your own server if you're that concerned.

How are permissions managed so that you can change your followers configuration to point at your new account if you move, but otherwise not allow anybody else to pull that same stunt against your wishes?

On your old account you have to start the process.

> if a mastodon.art user is banned from mastodon.art - everyone who followed them will have to find them on another instance and subscribe again?

To be fair, that's an improvement over, say, Twitter, where they'd just be gone.

I agree. The idealist in me wants all of these aspects to be completely independent from the host I choose to use. But realistically I am not that worried about losing data, the social graph is far more valuable. Even if I have 100 followers, I would still really want to preserve their connection to me if I am banned.

I understand that I can do this by hosting my own instance - that's a good enough solution (for me).

IMO the bigger issue isn't getting banned, it seems the more likely scenario is having the operator of the server decide for whatever reason to shut it down. This isn't likely to happen with Twitter.

It's perhaps less likely for Twitter than any one given Fediverse server/Mastodon instance. But the impact on the whole ecosystem is very different too. A single Fediverse instance shutting down could be annoying/sad, but it would only affect a subset of users, and those users could still, if need be, create a new account on another instance. Twitter shutting down closes everything for everyone.

Relatedly, Twitter isn't going to throw a bake sale to try to stop from shutting down, it will get devoured as quickly as it files Chapter 7 or Chapter 11 and debt holders descend like vultures.

Most Mastodon instances are community run, and when they hit some rough straits in paying for their hosting some of them will have a (metaphorical) bake sale encouraging users to contribute to the hosting fund Patreon or will ask around if someone wants to take over the admin hot seat for a while.

For those concerned about the longevity of specific instances that's generally the answer: ask the community how the admin pays for things, look for their Patreon, consider chipping in what you can each month.

you may be interested in something like nostr, nomadnet, iris, or ssb. these all have decentralized identities baked in.

> At first this bugged me, but then it was pointed out that if you could just move your posts you could also potentially violate the moderation rules of the host you were moving to. So it makes some sense.

So moderate it the same as if you reposted everything? I don't understand.

To start, you should choose an instance that had been around for a while and isn't too small. Instances do shutdown occasionally but the admin(s) will give you plenty of time to migrate to a new instance. Mastodon has built-in tools to migrate your whole account (and content) to another instance if needed. I'm currently having to do that because a large well-established instance (mastodon.technology) is shutting down the end of the year.

> but the admin(s) will give you plenty of time to migrate to a new instance

that seems like a big assumption - if I'm running an instance, what's to stop me pulling the plug with zero notice?

This seems like a big weak point. I went to check it out just now and it's like "pick a server" and... I don't know, which one is best? Can I change later? Seems confusing, pass for now.

It's federated. Much like email. You can follow people on other servers and it pulls their feed. If you want to switch servers, you just make a new account (and just like email you'll need to tell your followers where you are going)

> It's federated. Much like email.

How feasible is it to have a username at a custom domain? In case the server you sign up on goes out of service. Do you have to set up your own instance in order to do that? Is there a barrier from setting up a new instance and then participating immediately in the wider federated network?

I was just investigating this. You can run your own Mastodon instance on your custom domain (e.g. masto.host), but due to how Mastodon federation works, your instance will 1. host all your content 2. handle a ton of requests when people interact with you or your content: follow, favorite, boost, etc.

Also every time a user follows you from an instance not federated with your instance it's a whole complicated process because federation has to be established between your instance and their instance (and, I think, every instance that they follow users from).

So if I understand your question correctly: there is no way to separate your identity from your content. If you want to own your identity you will need to self-host.

I am realizing now that the solution to these concerns is likely going to emerge from matrix.org, not Mastodon.

Seems like there must be some sort of possibility for someone to create some sort of "lightweight hosting" option here. Where you get your own bespoke "host" where you own all the data and identity, etc. but it is actually physically managed on someone else's infra (something higher level than a vhost). Pay a small fee, get a subdomain, get your own masto node, get your own data, all encrypted, but someone else handles all the legwork of setting it up, federating it, etc.

Yes, you are describing a hosted instance. Masto.host looks good, and the cheapest option is only $6/month. The problem with this federated approach is that the actual federation features can become pretty expensive. Hosting is cheap but if you have thousands of followers from different instances federation processes will become very expensive.

As far as I know, this is all cached at an instance level. So only the first person to pull something from your instance actually hits your instance's resources. I can still see posts and users from dead instances because it's all cached on my instance. There's a rake task to wipe it, but people are advised not to since those caches have been what saved at least one instance whose name I can't remember.

> "host" where you own all the data and identity, etc. but it is actually physically managed on someone else's infra (something higher level than a vhost)

Isn’t this just a normal Mastadon instance but with custom domain support just like email providers?

Feasible, but I don't think everyone having their own individual server was the intent of the design. Yes to question 2. I'm not sure about question 3, if there is a barrier, it isn't large.

Because you can move between different domains without losing your subscriptions and subscribers, there is no real need to use your custom domain. But because it's not possible to move your old content (I assume because moving files is difficult), I still am self-hosting so I can own my own content.

Another way of doing it is if you're already posting your notes, pictures, etc. on your own website, you can make it ActivityPub aware and use your website instead of Mastodon.

> Another way of doing it is if you're already posting your notes, pictures, etc. on your own website, you can make it ActivityPub aware and use your website instead of Mastodon.

I quite like the sound of this, do you have any references you can suggest?

I found this announcement by write.as (check out the video): https://write.as/new/blog/federated

Seems like it's possible to implement just enough of ActivityPub functionality that Mastodon users will be able to follow you.

As an example https://aaronparecki.com/ does it, but when it comes to documentation entry page https://activitypub.rocks/ and otherwise https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/

Ok, but which one is hotmail and which one is gmail?

It's different because feature-wise all Mastodon instances are quite similar (some might have bigger character limit etc.)

Generally it's best to choose a niche instance so you inherit a community of people with common interests instantly which makes onboarding much easier. For example, I'm on fosstodon.org for free software and photog.social for photography.

photog.social is an example of where it being independent is both good and bad. Good, because independent. Bad, because it's just someone else's expensive computer.

https://photog.social/@ambassador/109080532230127913

When you settle on an instance, make sure to contribute to its upkeep if you can.

>Does it make any difference where I register first?

Yes; Each instance has its own posting rules and an instance may suspend (block) another instance for different reasons. Mastodon.social has suspended quite a few instances, for example. Always read the about page of the instance before registering.

https://mastodon.social/about