NOTE: If anyone wants to be added to this list just let me know.

Ok so this seems to be most of the people who publicly stated they had interest in developing the "United Federation of Instances". All of you should have gotten the first draft and opinions were heard and discussed.

Today I will be moving the first draft over to git (either or From there I will encourage each of you to provide suggestions as to edits there, and raise discussions in issues. This way we will be public and have an open transparent forum that keeps the changes on record.

While public feedback is being debated on the proposal I will begin a rough draft on the complete by laws (which will try to represent the broader points in the proposal document). That too will be on gitlab and open to discussion

From there as the movement grows we can begin discussing launching it.

I suggest all communication on the fediverse about this use the hashtag so it is easily searchable.

Since this is a public post I will now share the link to the early draft here, please keep in mind everything here is open for discussion so if anyone doesnt like the current direction, please speak up, we want you to be heard.

@skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @ichoran @realcaseyrollins @stux @stux @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq

Β· Β· 15 Β· 12 Β· 19

@freemo @skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux @stux @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq

I am following you so as long as your toots are not private, I can read them and it's fine.

The 3 is not clear. I feel like a comma is missing:

If a user explicitly asks you to disengage explicit calls to
dogpile will not be acceptable.

@freemo @skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux @stux @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq

I disagree with "6. Nudity and pornography must be posted either unlisted,
with a content warning, or both." Sex workers shouldn't be treated as something shameful that needs to be hidden. Nudity is ultimately, normal and healthy, and should be treated as such.


That is worth a debate once it goes to git. I agree that sex workers should not be shamed. If they wish to show pictures of themselves that arent nude they are welcome to do so. But at the same time most people dont want nudity in their feed, especially when they view it in public spaces. It isnt about the sex workers or if their work is shameful or not, its more about nudity showing up on peoples screen at work or other places where it will get people fired.

@skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux @stux @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq

@freemo @JoshuaACasey @skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux @stux @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq :comfypeek: [quinn enters the hellthread]

this is kinda a non-issue because there are already MRFs to force censor instances and users if that's what the locals want.


Yes we could potentially handle this by having a shared list of instances that allow nudity in plain site.. users can then choose to adopt that block list if they want.

The problem with this approach is that it forces users to either block nudity entierly, or allow it in plain view. In the end I think this will harm people who wish to share nudity since it will force people to block them even if they want to see it some of the time. By requiring a CW instead these people will get more exposure since users can choose to uncover the CW or not and thus arent forced to take an all-or-nothing approach.

@Ryle @ejg @floppy @jq @dashrandom @stux @stux @stevenclyman @darnell @aebrockwell @AlanOutback @Gaythia @ichoran @JoshuaACasey @khird @robryk @Romaq @skanman @tatzelbrumm @trinsec @john @tsomof @realcaseyrollins


I need to check the mod tools on mastodon... you might be right. I've only seen blocking all media, and ive been able to make media senative from an individual user... gotta see hwo we do that on an instance level... worth discussing.. lets try to leave that to GIT once its posted.

@Ryle @ejg @floppy @jq @dashrandom @stux @stux @stevenclyman @darnell @aebrockwell @AlanOutback @Gaythia @ichoran @JoshuaACasey @khird @robryk @Romaq @skanman @tatzelbrumm @trinsec @john @tsomof @realcaseyrollins

Quick thought. I just ran out and bought the following two domains for this:

UnitedFederationOfInstances (both .com and .org)


Perhaps we should move the hashtag to instead? Thoughts.

@dashrandom @JoshuaACasey @skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux @stux @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq

From a branding perspective, makes sense to move the hashtag for uniformity

@freemo @skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk@qoto. How does the silent majority, that might feel that discussing an idea is giving credit to the idea, factor in, if at all? Democracy might work as a viable solution against absolutism, but since these concepts mostly apply to statehoods instead of discourses I think there is an error of categories going on here. Also 500 characters is not enough to reply (participate) in this thread.


At qoto we have a much higher character count, some other instances have it as well. That said you are welcome to wait till its on GIT where you have more characters as well, up to you.

As for those who are against the idea and wish to protest it by being silent, thats up to them. Either it will hurt their cause because they wont get a voice, or it will have their intended effect... But we cant account for people who refuse to speak.

@skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman

@sozialwelten well a silent majority can be given opportunities via polling right?


It might be difficult to maintain a complete list of people that are interested in the topic over time. (And it's challenging for the character limited of a post.)

How about installing a group? Maybe @ufi?

@skanman @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq

Creating a group sounds like a good idea (was going to bring up the QOTO group server again soon which has better tools than

That said I think using the hashtag or will do better for comms here. Plus once its on GIT maintaining a list here will be less critical and I think the hashtag and/or group will cover that well.

So yea, agreed basically

@floppy @ufi @skanman @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux @stux @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq

@freemo i don't have post size to include mentions. I realize I may have controversial opinions, but will try to elaborate.

CoC: I have always found this a dubious beast. Somehow it feels like the right idea expressed badly. So my 2 cents:

1) why not mention humane treatment (UDHR) and emphasize that freedom of expression+opinion does not mean you are allowed to be infinitely cruel in doing so.

2) is tricky, because every situation is context-dependent. Instead of "hunting down" [..]


I think these suggestions will best be served when we get the gitlab up, which im doing now. There you can suggest specific edits and we can all debate it.

My concern is that whatever rules we pick need to be concrete, and objective such that they can be proven or disproven via evidence... granted there will always be some level of subjectvitiy, but I'd like that to be clear if possible.

@floppy @ufi @ufoi @skanman @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux @stux @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq

@freemo a previously misbehaving person, let their own repeated misbehavior unveil them. What if you discover a person had 3 accounts and 2 accounts exhibited acceptable behavior? Again, context matters, circumstances matter. You can always treat a exceptionally problematic case special.

3) I am not sure I understand what that means

4) clear purpose, but seems out of place in CoC. Just for purpose of avoiding spam.

5) not sure how to respond. First thing i did when joining fedi [..]

@timezoneless I will be creating the gitlab repo for this shortly. Would you mind repeating your concerns there and openning it for discussion.

@freemo sorry, was still writing. Have seen your comment now.

@freemo [..] was block a shit-ton of military propaganda. So the intent is clear, but not sure how I would phrase this.
Maybe it should be distinguished based on intent/size? Personal opinion vs company/military propaganda? Individual vs collective representation? Voicing opinion vs commercial interest? I don't have an answer, just pointing it out.

In general, I am concerned that in prescribing the larger scope you recreate your walled garden through these rules. Instead [..]

@freemo consider if it is possible to add a section in which you support your members such that it takes the pressure/stress away in case of an individual instance is under pressure. That way you manage yourself as instance and/or UFI without unnecessarily imposing rules on others. In a way, your own case of getting blocked/defederated(?) should mean that UFI alleviates the pressure because the other members are there (unless bad behavior).

@freemo Consider also what it means if instances do not follow prescribed rules outside of UFI. How do you interact with them? Maybe this is obvious but it isn't to me.

In general I think that the idea is far too heavy/elaborate. From what I understand we are talking mainly about individual bad actors.

The larger problem at hand seems to be how to wield the tools at hand for/against whole instances. I am worried that UFI may create a status rather than solve a problem.

@timezoneless We did address that breifly, maybe it needs more emphasis.. but basically an instance outside of the UFI will be treated however eachmember instance wishes to treat it, but it is encouraged no one assume they are bad actors simply for not being in the UFI.


I can't track down the proper message mentioning the hashtag, but it may be useful to make sure UFO Investigators (or some other interesting entity) doesn't already make use of #\UFOI to an extent it would be a problem. I think would be much less a problem. I wouldn't know. Checking may be useful.



The issue is that UFI isnt availible as a website, however we own.


you know i'm in the free speech camp, but this is a good draft. things get formalized properly and it's not based on "feelings" and "blocked because i have a bad day". i may have some points but i need to think about them first :)

@skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux @stux @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq


Someone called it the first digital constitituion :) That got me excited. Plus everyone of these people were really heklpful with feedback, so we got some good heads on this.

@Ryle @ejg @floppy @jq @dashrandom @stux @stux @stevenclyman @darnell @aebrockwell @AlanOutback @Gaythia @ichoran @khird @robryk @Romaq @skanman @tatzelbrumm @trinsec @john @tsomof

@freemo @skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq

I'd be open to joining, but I much prefer the language of the agreement to be on a positive tone. The abstract to me is history that I didn't really play in and i'd rather have it be something that sets the tone for a strong future vs what happened in the past.


I totally agree with you.

See this revision of the abstract a user proposed. I think it is much better, in line with your concerns, and I approve of it myself.

Please feel free to offer your own suggestions and throw in a merge request with your changes. Ill be happy to make the change once there is some discussion as to the best version.

@skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux @stux @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq


For my part, My current finances are in the position of "I have no idea what an extended family situation is going to cost me personally yet."

If I could, I'd run the current document through Grammarly's paid subscription and have it make suggested changes for exactly that... "passive vs. active" tone, various other changes based on a "business proposal" setting. I *think* it has one like that. Maybe. I simply can't do it, and I could only hope someone on this list is already paying for Grammarly (or a product like it) already so it isn't an extra expense to them.

*I* don't write proposals of any sort as a profession. But I'm confident someone has a meat-grinder for it while we work on making this sausage.

@freemo @skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq

I am an instance owner and admin and I never heard of a draft or one being developed. Looking at my pinned post, I wanted to start a discussion with all instance owners and have a few people interested in this too in my replies on the post.


Sounds like if we had the same intent you should just join us and propose edits.. We would love to hear your ideas. The Gitlab is up so just hop on in and create any issues or merge requests and we will all discuss it.

@skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux @stux @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq

@freemo @skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq

Amazingly well thought out. Looking forward to how this pans out. It's an absolute need to do this. I can see the problem you're trying to solve. It's a good move. Hopefully a consensus is reached.

@freemo I have "Git GUI Here" installed, but I usually use "Git BASH" for updating Spigot. Yay, the time when I know what something does and how it works, but I get to figure out how to use it practically on some other project!


- getting the wording of point 1 of the coc absolutely water-tight is critical. it was fine in the previous qoto tos, but when you apply it to a broader scale that a federation of servers is "Hate-based racism, sexism, and other hateful speech,[...]" isn't going to cut it. everything can be hateful speech with enough twisting. ideally it would be something like from hacker ethics: "Hackers should be judged by their hacking, not bogus criteria such as degrees, age, race, or position.". then, meritocracy has fallen from grace.

- put down what the expected response time for moderation is. people sleep, have other things to do, etc. you can't always have a moderation in place after an hour.

@skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux @stux @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq


I agree.. the proposal is meant to summarize the basic jist of it.. the bylaws document and Code of Ethics/Conduct documetn I write seperately will be much more detailed. I also agree the wording is very critical to strike a balance between justice and freedom.

@skanman @floppy @john @stevenclyman @robryk @ejg @dashrandom @Romaq @ichoran @AlanOutback @tsomof @aebrockwell @Ryle @tatzelbrumm @Gaythia @realcaseyrollins @stux @stux @trinsec @khird @darnell @jq

@freemo At the moment I'm flailing, but I'm not yet in a position to edit and I want to get this thing out of my head: "... communicating disrespect targeting a person's identity rather than their character. This behavior would often be characterized as (but not limited to) racism, sexism... (extend definitive list, avoid "hate speech" as a phrase.. and again "including but not limited to" is a wonderful phrase to use.)

TRUST ME, when I interact with flat earthers, I get mighty cranky and I'm sure they could label it as "hate speech." But I'm clearly not attacking their identity, just their bloody-minded stupidity.

@Romaq Can you at least crete and issue ther eand just copy and paste it in, this way we keep it.

@freemo Yeah, I just need to get moving to recover from work. Gawd this thing keeps moving and I want to follow what's going on while I'm doing what I really ought to be doing instead.

@freemo I now have the git repository local. The Git GUI doesn't show me branches and changes, so I did it wrong. OF COURSE. But that's ok, my opportunity to learn, and being able to see changes would be more useful, I'd think. I'll post my message where the issue is already being discussed if there is anything it would contribute at that point.

@freemo AND I deleted the local copy as it didn't show me anything of what has currently been changed, so I'm not clear it will do what I intended and I didn't want a "this doesn't work" project folder where I've begun putting Mastodon stuff.

I'll figure out what I need to know in due course.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.