I don't feel that comfortable with Mastodon's decentralised concept. While the servers are decentralised accounts are tied to one server.
Who's behind a server, how commited they are to continue their service: Nobody knows. (Except for mastodon.social itself.)
With server-specific accounts, one's in the hands of the admins: When they decide to stop, the accounts' accumulated social capital is gone.
I'd love to have accounts you can migrate from one server to another without losing connections.
@fxneumann While I don't agree with your concern about decentralization in principle (as it effectively prevents your scenario: no one rogue admin can silence you), I do agree that Mastodon needs much more seamless account migration. I want my username to be *my* username, not *a* username on a particular instance. I.e. federation wide, instead of instance specific. Included with this, of course, should be your network. This is, I think, key to proper decentralization.
@andschwa Don't get me wronng, having decentralised servers is great, so we basically agree. I just opt for double decentralisation: Servers and accounts. I still see the danger of silencing: While I can migrate my account and take my followings with me, I can't take my followers with me. I still can toot on another server, but once Mastodon is large enough, noone hears my tooting after losing followers.
