@flancian @srs @thor @SocialCoop @admin it’s really that quiet, there is no algorithm on Masto.

I think the primarily broadcast nature of commercial social media is different than micro blog / work out loud of different fediverse instances.

So what are the norms — and interfaces — of different instances?

@bmann @flancian @thor @SocialCoop @admin schelling.pt mostly feels like regular half-political vulnerable anonymous chaos twitter to me. - just with much lower bandwidth. @locus

darmstadt.social (which I follow via Fedilab) is basically this 1-2 open software nerds afaiu.

It would be so nice to have more filtering options btw. between local and global. Like "gimme these 5 instances put together, plus all follows".

@bmann @flancian @thor @SocialCoop @admin @locus (nb, this wasn't negative in any way. I like it here.)

@srs @bmann @thor @SocialCoop @admin @locus yeah, that's a great idea IMHO. 'local' and 'fediverse' are, like, two starter views.

Thesis: a good state for the fediverse is to have [[n]] socially curated timelines; that is, n timelines with open admission criteria/ranking algorithms maintained by the community.

@flancian @bmann @thor @SocialCoop @admin @locus ooh yes, maybe like a [[stoa]]? 😁

@srs @bmann @thor @SocialCoop @admin @locus true. Thank you for spotting!

a [[stoa]]: https://anagora.org/node/stoa

This seems to overlap with the scope of the first and second stoas to begin with.

@srs @flancian now I want user curated lists and descriptions of instances!

@bmann @srs I strongly agree.

These seem potentially relevant:

https://anagora.org/node/fediverse
https://anagora.org/node/fediverse-party
https://anagora.org/node/better-ranking
https://anagora.org/node/agora-fediverse-integration
https://anagora.org/node/agora-feature-requests

If you contribute to any of these nodes, we can use them to [[brainstorm]].

@bmann @srs we can also bring up an actual [[stoa]] by defining a [[git repo]] in which we all have commit access, use it like a very simple [[wiki]].