As a Mastodon subscriber on a typical server, I haven’t found any of that to be particularly necessary. Perhaps there are some advanced users who might find it useful though.

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Interesting. I feel like long term stability, up time and performance would be valuable to many users. In many ways I’d say just going on to mastodon.social is a bit of a cop out as it heavily dilutes the decentralised structure that is arguably the point of all of this. Multiple paid instances would be healthier. And there, as a user on a relatively peripheral instance but one that is paid-for, longevity and stability become increasingly valuable.

Otherwise, instance providers putting the work into trying to provide a relatively “complete” fediverse palette of tools while making it as easy as possible for the users could also be interesting.

[–] gregorum@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

What I mean is that long-term stability and up time don’t seem to be a problem for current servers.

[–] maegul@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

Yea I’d say it isn’t a problem for anyone until it is. All of the notable examples of a server going down that I’ve seen were a surprise to its users. On top of that, I’d expect many have fairly hefty expectations of their server’s longevity. Like 10-15 years, more or less as long as they’ve been using Twitter etc.

[–] thegiddystitcher@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

It's definitely an issue with small, niche servers unfortunately. Had a friend's just go down unexpectedly this week with no warning to let the handful of people on there migrate, so they're starting over from scratch. My craft server shut down a couple weeks ago although we did get a month warning there so could go through the proper migration process.

I try and donate to all my Fedi servers just to make it worth the admin's while, because I prefer smaller servers in general but don't want them to suddenly disappear!