Q: Obviously most people here are opposed to the presence of "brands" (companies) on Mastodon. I've seen people suggest that they could "have their own instance".
What about non-profits? (EFF, Greenpeace, etc) Any opinions?
@paulsheprow @nolan @CobaltVelvet @gargron agree with most of the sentiment others already expressed here.
I think org instances are a truly fascinating idea, and for real would love to see this tested out.
I will say, I don't see a whole lot of point in specifically "blocking" brands from creating accounts on other instances, but they should be silenced / banned if they're advertising (in which case why would they bother creating an account)
@tcql Yeah, I was wondering less about blocking and more about how people would feel about it. Elsewhere I value keeping up with what people working on behalf of issues that are important to me have to say. I use twitter to read much more than to write and follow ten times as many ppl as follow me. I don't get that as much here (yet).
Regarding tagging you in, I've just noticed that you have helpful input when I see you come across the timeline :-)
I'm kind of curious what brand-specific instances really look like though. Is it mostly folks who work for X company talking about non-company-private things related to X?
For software service companies this is pretty interesting - my company could easily have folks posting tips / tricks / tutorials pretty regularly. For something more traditional like McDonalds ... ??? do they just post coupons or something?
@tcql From an outwards-facing point of view I guess I visualized them more as private instances where this or that company controls their own data, and that they'd then just federate with other instances/users, and that not much would happen on the instance itself?
