> Host your own Mastodon server then, allows you to administrate your own account.

But that's the thing, I as an end user don't want to and shouldn't have to. Hosting my own instance is a pain in the ass that introduces needing a server to run it on, OS maintenance / updates, Mastodon instance maintenance / updates, paying for everything, ... It's a huge waste of my time and energy when decoupling identity from content solves it much more smoothly, for a much wider audience. If the goal of Mastodon isn't to attract that sort of audience, that's a separate issue, but that doesn't seem to be it from what I can see. Identity and content can both be federated without tying them together.

Sure, and it'd be kinda neat if I could, say, use DNS records in a way to allow specific servers to post as my identity, thus, both proving that I'm me (from the [email protected] sense), but also the server can post as me (maybe what I have to put in the record is me countersigning their sign-as-me key).

We don't have that yet. It'd be nice if we do someday.

> and it'd be kinda neat if I could, say, use DNS records in a way to allow specific servers to post as my identity

So, Bluesky? :P (I know it's not federated at this point in time)

By hosting your own Mastodon server, you are effectively buying into only receiving direct, point-to-point notifications and you lose what remains of the “overheard amongst acquaintances” effect that Twitter and now Bluesky effectively capture (that is, when it’s on the same, large instance).

Of course, replicating this effect would be a dump truck of load on every Mastodon server, but it’s also the experience most people seem to want, so that’s unfortunate.