@stefan Instead of "not always" I'd say "hardly ever".

And the resentment it builds while not working is far more detrimental than the progress it brings in the rare instances when it does work.

@crossgolf_rebel @jaz @josh Ideally? Sure.

Unfortunately, we have to deal with things and people how they are, not how they should be.

@crossgolf_rebel @jaz @josh I won't go into the pluses and minuses of small vs. large instances. I'm thinking exclusively about what kind of map would be more effective in showing the realities of the fediverse to the outside world.

And, to the outside world, a map where every other instance people find is a self-hosted one, will be ignored because "bah, there's nobody there".

That's how they think. And we won't change how they think unless we show them that "actually, there IS people there."

@crossgolf_rebel @jaz @josh And that's fine, but woudn't it be more accurate in terms of ecosystem portrait to prioritize largeish instances instead of ignoring them while adding tons of single-user self-hosted stuff? I mean, those are also part of the ecosystem, but they inflate the number of instances for a pretty low overall quantity of users.

@jaz @crossgolf_rebel @josh That's quite likely, and if so it paints a misleading picture of the whole ecosystem. To establish how european something is, ownership is more important than membership and way more important than hosting location, I think.

Otherwise would be a bit like saying something is American because it uses Cloudflare.

Also, the map is incomplete. Where's venera.social, for instance? Nowhere to be seen. (It's a German Friendica instance)

@crossgolf_rebel @jaz @josh That map is... weird.

Masto.pt is in... Dunkerk?!

Outmo.de is in... the Azores?!