Ooooooooooooohhhhhh! Thanks Nathan for pointing out the study of the rules. I can't wait to read it, and think about it a bit. I've been interested in the rules and how different the philosophical bases are between instances.

@cyberlyra @natematias @bkeegan @cfiesler @fediversereport

@Nathan Schneider I'd love to have a look at the second document, but ACM is very unfriendly towards well-secured desktop browsers. I ended up IP-blocked due to what was perceived as non-standard behaviour which probably means that I haven't just loaded the page and then the document exactly once.

That said, I guess the author of that document steps right into the same trap as everyone else who does something related to the #Fediverse without being an avid, well-informed user of many months, namely assume that the Fediverse is only #Mastodon. Granted, the document is about, quote, "Popular Mastodon Instances", but it might also mention interaction with the rest of the Fediverse and do as if this whole rest of the Fediverse is only Mastodon. This is more than just a technicality: Some aspects about Mastodon rules do not translate to all Fediverse projects, others do not translate to anything that is not Mastodon.

@jupiter_rowland Oh that is weird. I know the feeling, I get into trouble all the time for my basic security practices.

I know these authors are very well-informed (for instance, one is actively advocating a fediverse strategy on our campus). My reading is just that they are focusing on one platform for the sake of simplicity. They write, "Mastodon instances constitute part of the broader Fediverse," which I don't think claims that Mastodon constitutes the entire fediverse at all.