I gotta admit, I am loving how little of the conversation is just "BlueSky bad! Mastodon good! 🤡" and how much of it is "BlueSky is not ideal for Black users, but let's be for real, neither is Mastodon. We don't have control over BlueSky, but we do have some agency with Mastodon. How can we make Mastodon better? Where are we with improving the issues that make this place unwelcoming for Black users? Clearly, more Black users chose BlueSky than Mastodon. Have we addressed the reasons why?" ♥️🥹
Seriously, I count ~5 conversations in the improvement framing direction. I love to see it! Shame on me for having lower expectations.
I'm unapologetically backing improvements across ActivityPub and ATProto. I back Hachyderm/Mastodon and BlackSky. You can just back both teams! Nothing in the rules says you can't do that!
like this
reshared this
Ivey Janette McClelland
in reply to mekka okereke • • •I choose Mastodon.
I was already here before Bluesky and Spoutible came along. I came here from the dead bird site after Elmo took over.
I feel safer here. I can wield the block button a lot quicker here.
Plus I can use language that I don't feel comfortable using on those other sites.
Oh,and Mastodon is international. Including the Diaspora.
I'm on those other sites,but I feel more at home on Mastodon.
#blackmastodon
reshared this
jdm2 🇵🇷, mekka okereke, Demian, Mastodon Migration, tools for commensality 🧿, Solarbird, StoneBear, Mark de Vries 🇪🇺, The Animal and the Machine and Debbie Goldsmith 🏳️⚧️♾️🇺🇦 reshared this.
Daniël Franke
in reply to Ivey Janette McClelland • • •Jürgen Hubert
in reply to Daniël Franke • • •@ainmosni @IveyJanette
I would not say that. I made contact with some awesome people from outside Europe and North America on Old Twitter by deliberately seeking them out, such as an electrical engineer from Kenya or a folklore researcher from Pakistan. They were actually out there, though the algorithm favored people from your own cultural environment.
Mastodon, on the other hand, has a user base that is _heavily_ centered on Europe and North America. I have been wondering how to change that for quite some time.
Daniël Franke
in reply to Jürgen Hubert • • •I both see your point and semi agree with you, I didn't mean that there were no non-Americans on twitter, just that whatever was happening in the US was what was the only thing talked about on twitter, taking the air out of any other conversation.
So yeah, in the end there were more nationalities on twitter, but the discourse was much more American.
Rob Ricci
in reply to Jürgen Hubert • • •@juergen_hubert @ainmosni @IveyJanette
Here are some threads by @feralthoughts on the current issues with bringing in folks from the global south that I found very thoughtful and informative:
union.place/@feralthoughts/114…
union.place/@feralthoughts/114…
Feral Thoughts
2025-02-19 12:37:44
reshared this
Ivey Janette McClelland and Feral Thoughts reshared this.
Ivey Janette McClelland
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •Feral Thoughts
in reply to Rob Ricci • • •@ricci @juergen_hubert @ainmosni @IveyJanette
This one is not on the "global south invisibility" problem, but I wrote a short thread suggesting that an option to prevent hidden abusive racist pile-on in the replies would be to allow only new posts to select a "privacy level". Every single reply in a thread or sub-thread should mandatorily inherit the "privacy level" of the parent post.
In case you are interested:
union.place/@feralthoughts/115…
Feral Thoughts
2025-10-09 18:52:57
micchiato 🍉
in reply to Ivey Janette McClelland • • •@IveyJanette
Moderators of the instance you are on suspended my account there almost exactly a year ago for posting pro-Palestine content like the screenshot below and for comparing genocide to the Holocaust. Given the potential for moderation bias and intolerance here, Mastodon has not been any better for me than any other social media platform.
@mekkaokereke
Ivey Janette McClelland
in reply to micchiato 🍉 • • •micchiato 🍉
in reply to Ivey Janette McClelland • • •@IveyJanette
Your reply reads like you believe I was careless in my posting. Do you believe that I deserved to be kicked off the instance?
Ivey Janette McClelland
in reply to micchiato 🍉 • • •Sreedev Krishnakumar
in reply to Ivey Janette McClelland • • •Ivey Janette McClelland
in reply to Sreedev Krishnakumar • • •M. Grégoire
in reply to mekka okereke • • •George B
in reply to M. Grégoire • • •@mpjgregoire
Here are some:
topspicy.social/@meljoann/1153…
sakurajima.moe/@literalgrill/1…
This sub thread of a different one veers in that direction pretty fast:
mastodon.online/@mastodonmigra…
@mpjgregoire
Here are some:
topspicy.social/@meljoann/1153…
sakurajima.moe/@literalgrill/1…
This sub thread of a different one veers in that direction pretty fast:
mastodon.online/@mastodonmigra…
Meljoann
2025-10-07 09:44:16
Stephen Bannasch (316 ppm)
in reply to M. Grégoire • • •@mpjgregoire
Here’s one I boosted today: gts.sadauskas.id.au/@aj/status…
AJ Sadauskas
2025-10-07 11:30:13
@mpjgregoire
Here’s one I boosted today: gts.sadauskas.id.au/@aj/status…
AJ Sadauskas
2025-10-07 11:30:13
Mastodon Migration
in reply to mekka okereke • • •On the subject of improving Mastodon. This may be an opportunity to rekindle developer attention on the 'Followers Only' dogpiling harassment vector. Felt like some progress on the issue was made back in November, but don't know where it stands now.
cc: @stefan
Stefan Bohacek
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •@mastodonmigration
I wonder if @scottjenson might be interested in connecting with
@mekkaokereke, that is, if he'd like to share some thoughts.
(Unless you two already spoke, in which case, please disregard!)
Stefan Bohacek
in reply to Stefan Bohacek • • •@mastodonmigration But yes, that particular issue, I have not heard/seen any updates either.
@scottjenson @mekkaokereke
Scott Jenson
in reply to Stefan Bohacek • • •Yes, @mekkaokereke and I spoke about to how best present Quote Posts and his advice had a direct impact on what we shipped. We're about to reach out for another round of discussions with a wide range of people (but I don't think we've contacted Mekka just yet)
It's so tempting to take the engineering approach and think "this feature will do it!" when we likely need to back up and talk about bigger issues such as culture and moderation.
reshared this
mekka okereke, Su_G and Martin Vermeer FCD reshared this.
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Scott Jenson • • •Martin Vermeer FCD reshared this.
Scott Jenson
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Mastodon Migration
in reply to Scott Jenson • • •@scottjenson
@mekkaokereke
@stefan
Great. Just to be really clear. What seems to be the issue is a type of hidden dogpiling or 'brigading.'
A tight group folks who's purpose is to harass someone follow each other, 'the brigade'.
One of them composes a harassing post specifically targeting someone who they @ mention, and post it using "Followers Only" reply controls.
The rest of the 'brigade' piles on.
The post is only seen by the targeted person(s) and the harassers.
reshared this
Daniel Lakeland and Martin Vermeer FCD reshared this.
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •@scottjenson @stefan
There may be other similar issues, but this one clearly seems to be a problem that is often cited.
Nik
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •@mastodonmigration @scottjenson @stefan
I think I have client-side improvements for this that effectively hide the harassment.
- pachli.app/pachli/2024/11/28/2…
- pachli.app/pachli/2025/02/28/2…
I haven't received much feedback about either, so if you have any, or know anyone who would benefit from these changes, please let me know.
Pachli 2.9.0 released
Pachlireshared this
mekka okereke and Audun reshared this.
Audun
in reply to Nik • • •Nik
in reply to Audun • • •No, it filters notifications about favourites and boosts too. It always allows notifications about:
- posts you interacted with (voting in a poll, a post *you* boosted or favourited has been edited)
- moderation reports you made
- broken follower relationships (e.g., moderators blocked a server with accounts you follow)
- moderation actions on your account
github.com/pachli/pachli-andro…
- notifications you get if you're a server admin
pachli-android/app/src/main/java/app/pachli/components/notifications/NotificationHelper.kt at 2a1743b93fb690cf2193ae0210368f2d0612ece5 · pachli/pachli-android
GitHubOskar im Keller
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •@mastodonmigration @scottjenson @stefan
Thanks for the explanation. That looks like really vile bullying tactics.
Scott Jenson
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •Can you help me understand how followers only posts are harder for moderation to catch? I understand they are not public but they can still be reported? I'm trying to tackle this problem from the moderation agle as a server block helps so many more people (if we can pull it off)
Scott Jenson
in reply to Scott Jenson • • •@mastodonmigration @stefan My other question is accounts like this seem likely to get blocked from your server for other reasons. They would have to use this trick 100% of the time to avoid detection.
I'm NOT saying this isn't happening. I'm just trying to understand how these accounts behave so we can find, I hope, an even better way of shutting them down.
evana
in reply to Scott Jenson • • •@scottjenson @mastodonmigration @stefan followers-only posts require the *victim* to report the attack. Depending on the volume and ferocity of the harassment, the victim may not be in a position to do this (either due to harassment across several channels, or unawareness of reporting and moderation options).
As an example, I piled into this thread to help out with an example, but I wouldn't have seen it to help out if it were "followers only".
I can see the positive value in being able to restrict a discussion, but it seems like "all my friends plus one more" might be a dangerous model.
Take all this with a grain of salt, as I haven't actually been subject to this kind of abuse, and am privileged in a bunch of ways which probably shield me from having to consider the worst of it.
Stefan Bohacek
in reply to evana • • •@evana Really well summed up!
@scottjenson @mastodonmigration
Scott Jenson
in reply to evana • • •@evana @mastodonmigration @stefan This is very helpful thank you. The workaround suggested is to have new filter that blocks all followers only posts that also include you. For this to be effective, it would need to default to being ON, which might rub many the wrong way. Defaulting to OFF means victims need to find and turn this on (which seems unlikely)
I'm trying to brainstorm other solutions that offer more protection (but I'm coming up short) Are there any others?
Scott Jenson
in reply to Scott Jenson • • •One additional thought. If we default this filter to on and it DOES fire, this could be a moderator visible event?
The other solution is just to somehow flag any followers-only posts that @ include you in a way that makes reporting it a one-click event for the victim.
Stefan Bohacek
in reply to Scott Jenson • • •@scottjenson Not sure if I understand the question myself. Do you mean whether someone posting a followers-only + 1 post would automatically flag that post for moderation?
That's a tricky one. Now that I think about it, I might've actually received replies to my posts that were followers-only+1 (me). No abuse, just regular replies, I suppose the person wanted a bit more privacy?
@evana @mastodonmigration
Scott Jenson
in reply to Stefan Bohacek • • •@stefan @evana @mastodonmigration Exactly, that's why I asked the second question: make it a simple one-click for the target to report it.
The filter (if it defaults to off) isn't good enough. Most people just won't know how to turn it on.
Stefan Bohacek
in reply to Scott Jenson • • •@scottjenson
I know we're very early into the conversation, and I'm sure more ideas will come up, but so far everything is just telling me that followers-only+1 posts should not be possible and rejected as "+1 is not a follower".
The workarounds are getting confusing.
@evana @mastodonmigration
Scott Jenson
in reply to Stefan Bohacek • • •I agree! But you're pointing out one of the pros/cons of the fediverse. Restricting followers-only to not have a +1 is a client limitation, something that could be avoided with a custom client.
Repeat after me: "Federation makes everything harder"
Stefan Bohacek
in reply to Scott Jenson • • •Right, but could the message get rejected by the server when it sees a "followers only" visibility, and the recipient is not a follower?
Almost like a quick, temporary auto-block of the sender.
@evana @mastodonmigration
Scott Jenson
in reply to Stefan Bohacek • • •@stefan @evana @mastodonmigration yes, if this is a server feature and not a client one, then my concern goes away.
But I can 100% guarantee you that there is a small group of people that do this for very positive and supportive reasons that will be quite miffed if we do this (which just might be necessary!)
This is why I'm trying to find other ways of looking at this problem. I want to solve it! Just trying to find the right lever.
Stefan Bohacek
in reply to Scott Jenson • • •@scottjenson It just sounds like we might need to turn the conversation around and instead of asking how to mitigate this feature's potential for abuse, a better question might be, why is this useful?
If to limit a posts visibility, maybe using "quiet public" is a better option?
@evana @mastodonmigration
Stefan Bohacek
in reply to Stefan Bohacek • • •@scottjenson
Just trying to imagine this playing out IRL. Someone pulls me to the side to talk to me, surrounds me with their buddies. Now, they might all be very nice people. But this situation just sounds inherently threatening.
@evana @mastodonmigration
Scott Jenson
in reply to Stefan Bohacek • • •evana
in reply to Scott Jenson • • •@scottjenson @mastodonmigration @stefan I don't have good ideas yet, but a couple probably-obvious observations:
* New and less-technical users are probably more likely to completely exit the platform due to harassment
* Experienced and technical users will probably have connections and better ability to bring tools into play
* Followers-only specifically separates the participants from any other network than the original poster. This probably needs to be communicated _really clearly_
* I can see followers-only as a good solution for sensitive discussions, but you want the recipients to understand that the information is sensitive so they don't allude to it/repost it without that privacy
* There's a tension between privacy defaults and broadening the web of social connection and discovery. The most private default would remove a lot of the social network value, so you'll rarely get a clear "win" without at least some damage to other cases
Scott Jenson
in reply to evana • • •@evana @mastodonmigration @stefan Agree with your points but we're still circling around the issue of how likely this happens (and how)
I DONT want to imply I don't believe people that say it happens, I'm just trying to understand the broader flow, i.e. how can a Brigade operate in secrecy? It just seems very fragile as they likely do other things that get them banned. Have we seen a large scale brigade that worked this way for a while? What causes them to trip up? Let's focus on that.
infinite love ⴳ
in reply to Scott Jenson • • •@scottjenson @evana @mastodonmigration @stefan
> they likely do other things that get them banned
not necessarily? think of a messaging app that supports group messages. you create a group chat with your buddies and one other person. the person being added can:
- not accept the invite
- remove themselves from the group
- block people in the group
- report messages in the group
in the last scenario, mods do not have full context. the user has to attach any relevant context.
infinite love ⴳ
in reply to infinite love ⴳ • • •@scottjenson @evana @mastodonmigration @stefan but because there is a private aspect, you would be free to act differently than you would otherwise act in public, and your only avenue for consequences would be *if* the added person reports y'all.
so the gap here is that people aren't being made aware that they can/should report such harassment. i don't think doing away with private posts solves anything.
one thing that could be done is to filter followers-only like mentioned-only, but...
infinite love ⴳ
in reply to infinite love ⴳ • • •@scottjenson @evana @mastodonmigration @stefan ...such a change might be unexpected if not communicated appropriately ahead-of-time. in effect, it would collapse the "public"/"followers"/"direct" into just "public"/"not public".
you'd probably also want the filter to be a bit smarter about what counts as "unsolicited", because even public mentions can be "unsolicited".
and of course i'd be remiss to leave out my usual advocacy for allowing people to create explicit contexts which they control!
mayel
in reply to evana • • •Re: I gotta admit, I am loving how little of the conversation is just "BlueSky bad!
Martin Vermeer FCD
in reply to mayel • • •It would only make it a little more difficult. The 'brigading' is now a two-step process for every participant.
The vector is really the 'followers-only' option. It is what allows the secret preparation. If we want to keep it, no way around sending a mandatory copy to a designated 'brigading moderator'.
Mastodon Migration
in reply to Scott Jenson • • •@scottjenson @stefan
This was in another thread discussing the issue. Not sure if what it reports is accurate vis a vis moderator limitations. Could it be a GDPR issue?
"This technique is insidious in another way too. As a moderator, you can't look at non-public posts unless someone specifically reports them, so your ability to understand the context is severely limited. Sometimes you literally can't see the harassment even when you go looking for it."
sfba.social/@EverydayMoggie/11…
moggie
2025-10-07 04:25:48
Scott Jenson
in reply to Mastodon Migration • • •@mastodonmigration @stefan The "math" checks out. I don't deny this is happening. At the same time, none of us in this thread says we've ever experienced it. We can't fight a problem we don't properly understand.
What would help is talking to people/moderators that have had to deal with this. I have to assume this is a fairly common problem so finding people to talk to should be fairly easy I would hope.
Feral Thoughts
in reply to Stefan Bohacek • • •@stefan @mastodonmigration @scottjenson
One option to prevent hidden abusive pile-on in the replies would be to allow only new posts to select a "privacy level". Every single reply in a thread or sub-thread should mandatorily inherit the "privacy level" of the parent post.
I wrote a thread elaborating on this argument.
union.place/@feralthoughts/115…
Feral Thoughts
2025-10-09 18:52:57
Emelia 👸🏻
in reply to Stefan Bohacek • • •Stefan Bohacek
in reply to Emelia 👸🏻 • • •Orion Ussner kidder
in reply to mekka okereke • • •mekka okereke reshared this.
Klara ❤️
in reply to mekka okereke • • •I'm happy to see this as well, both in the sense that I myself tend to like the Fediverse more because the way it works makes more sense to me if I were to structure a decentralised social network, and I like to see it grow and get better, but also, I'm very glad to see projects like BlackSky! I haven't looked too deeply into BlackSky, but it looks like it aims to deal with a lot of the criticisms I have of how BlueSky is set up, and overall making a more safe platform for people.
On both sides, this makes me feel a lot better recommending both protocols for people, and I think BlackSky has good potential in keeping the good of BlueSky, but showing people who are already on that protocol the benefits of actual decentralisation. Might even lead me to use ATProto in some form. I'm at the very least curious about it
mekka okereke reshared this.
frocksupreme
in reply to mekka okereke • • •David Chisnall (*Now with 50% more sarcasm!*)
in reply to frocksupreme • • •@frocksupreme
I’ve seen a lot of posts from black folks who have encountered racism here, far more than would let me dismiss it as statistical outliers (no platform will ever make everyone happy, but if the people who are unhappy are clustered in a particular demographic then it’s a symptom of bias).
The thing that confuses me is that a lot of other marginalised groups seem to constantly report either positive or less-negative-than-elsewhere experiences here. I am curious why, for example, trans people seem to have better experiences than black people here. It suggests that prejudices against different groups are manifesting in different ways and that the tools for addressing the arising problems need to be different. I’ve not yet seen anyone articulating what the differences are though, and since I tend to see these things only second or third hand, I am not able to answer the question myself.
frocksupreme
in reply to David Chisnall (*Now with 50% more sarcasm!*) • • •David Chisnall (*Now with 50% more sarcasm!*)
in reply to frocksupreme • • •frocksupreme
in reply to David Chisnall (*Now with 50% more sarcasm!*) • • •GunChleoc
in reply to frocksupreme • • •@frocksupreme Trans people have more safety in numbers here than POC.
One very easy trick to hide dogpiling from everybody else is to make a followers-only post and tag the person you're harassing.
Also, white folx like us don't always recognize racism for what it is when we see it.
For the history, logicmag.io/policy/blackness-i… is a good read
On what you can do now, privacy.thenexus.today/start-m…
5 things white people can do to start making the fediverse less toxic for Black people
Jon (The Nexus Of Privacy)frocksupreme
in reply to GunChleoc • • •GunChleoc
in reply to frocksupreme • • •@frocksupreme Most of the racism I've seen here I've only seen because I follow the fediblock hashtag. Some pretty vile stuff gets reported there.
Without that and without following any black users, I would be completely oblivious of this thing going on, because my corner of the fedi doesn't get harassed.
So, yes, what you see depends a lot on your bubble.
punIssuer
in reply to frocksupreme • • •Mark Dingemanse
in reply to frocksupreme • • •frocksupreme
in reply to Mark Dingemanse • • •the esoteric programmer
in reply to frocksupreme • • •frocksupreme
in reply to the esoteric programmer • • •problem. maybe you have
the esoteric programmer
in reply to frocksupreme • • •frocksupreme
in reply to the esoteric programmer • • •the esoteric programmer
in reply to frocksupreme • • •Sashin
in reply to mekka okereke • • •Prof. Rachel Thorn 🍉🇺🇦🏳️⚧️🏳️
in reply to mekka okereke • • •Glyph
in reply to mekka okereke • • •Oggie
in reply to mekka okereke • • •I have been watching people assert that the problems with mastodon are too confusing, or picked the wrong servers, and that's why a lot of black people left.
But not from, you know, asking the people why they left.
Imani
in reply to mekka okereke • • •reshared this
mekka okereke, May Likes Toronto, GunChleoc and Andres reshared this.
mekka okereke
in reply to Imani • • •@imanijoy @scottjenson
I'm happy to connect!
And thank you for working on Mastodon!
Moose Jolly Holcomb
in reply to mekka okereke • • •the main point I wholeheartedly agree with, and it's one of the reasons I've been spending more time in the last several months on Bluesky.
The last point though I think is key, folks should have more than one place they go for social media, rather than putting all their eggs in one basket.
Jürgen Hubert
in reply to mekka okereke • • •May Likes Toronto
in reply to mekka okereke • • •Claudius Link reshared this.
Pxtl
in reply to mekka okereke • • •imho, the fact that fediverse has more history in being multi-instance makes it better for this, even if the tools aren't there yet.
BSky is still more cathedral than bazaar, its ability to federate is mostly theoretical, so protecting people is still mostly dependent on Jay. Whereas "we protect us" is more doable on Fedi.
Not to say there isn't a lot to learn from BSky though.
Jackie 🍉🏳️⚧️☭
in reply to mekka okereke • • •Ludwig Vielfrass
in reply to mekka okereke • • •Jon_Alper
in reply to mekka okereke • • •mekka okereke
in reply to Jon_Alper • • •@jon_alper @lisamelton
No.
Black people that try to avoid white people with takes like the one that Jon just shared, choose BlueSky.
Jon_Alper
in reply to mekka okereke • • •mekka okereke
in reply to Jon_Alper • • •@jon_alper @lisamelton
You're literally on here not listening to a Black person that faces racism, about what you think is racism, while not accepting that Black people have a legitimate reason to not want to be in a place where dudes like you dismiss their need for community, and make insulting statements about why they don't want to be around people like you.
It's for the likes! That's the problem! 🤡
No. It's because dudes like you are exhausting.
Jon_Alper
in reply to mekka okereke • • •mekka okereke
in reply to Jon_Alper • • •@jon_alper @lisamelton
No, we're not "talking past each other." You're just in the mentions of a thread about why Mastodon can be less welcoming for Black people than BlueSky, illustrating the exact point, without a shred of irony.
Jon_Alper
in reply to mekka okereke • • •Ivey Janette McClelland
Unknown parent • • •wakingrufus
in reply to mekka okereke • • •1) we aren't there yet and there is a lot of work to do
2) it's good to be aware of what is happening in other socials, they may be useful ideas there we can use
3) there is noone that will fix fedi for us. It is up to all of us to figure it out
Stefan Bohacek
Unknown parent • • •@tomjennings That is truly awful. Thank you for sharing your experience, definitely important to hear about this!
@scottjenson @evana @mastodonmigration
Scott Jenson
Unknown parent • • •Mastodon Migration
Unknown parent • • •@tomjennings @scottjenson @stefan @evana
Tom, don't think that was what Scott was saying. This is a brainstorming session. As such, all aspects of the matter are being put on the table. The first step is to identify the problem in all it's complexities. It's a long way from making any kind of priority calls or implementation decisions. Feel like it is important to assume everyone has good intentions to constructively address the issue at this point.
Scott Jenson reshared this.