But if the fediverse isn’t actually distributed, then you don’t actually have the option, right? If 80% of activity is on one server, then that server effectively controls the fediverse, and if you have a problem with their admins or moderators, you don’t have a viable alternative.
If it’s not actually distributed, the fact that it theoretically could be doesn’t really matter. And this isn’t even mentioning the possibility of a centralized server having technical or legal issues.
The divorce analogy is not a good one because that’s an individual decision, whereas migrating servers and communities is not something that one individual person can just suddenly choose to do. It requires time, effort, and collective action, so it’s better to be pre-emptively distributed to eliminate that vulnerability in the first place.
But if the fediverse isn’t actually distributed, then you don’t actually have the option, right? If 80% of activity is on one server, then that server effectively controls the fediverse, and if you have a problem with their admins or moderators, you don’t have a viable alternative.
If it’s not actually distributed, the fact that it theoretically could be doesn’t really matter. And this isn’t even mentioning the possibility of a centralized server having technical or legal issues.
The divorce analogy is not a good one because that’s an individual decision, whereas migrating servers and communities is not something that one individual person can just suddenly choose to do. It requires time, effort, and collective action, so it’s better to be pre-emptively distributed to eliminate that vulnerability in the first place.