|
Top-level
@jdp23 @mike @brian @spreadmastodon@venera.social @fediversereport Taking notes on all this, thanks! Definitely will update the MAU and registered users numbers, but want to think more about what still ensures high capacity in an objective way. Up for suggestions to those numbers. 2 comments
@spreadmastodon@mastodon.social @jdp23 @mike @spreadmastodon@venera.social @fediversereport Saying it another way: I think the ultimate goal is to get a new user attached to the right instance. If they don’t know or care, then fine, go to .social. But if they have specific niche interests, then helping to guide them towards options is in support of “getting them attached to the right instance.” tl;dr - best fit > server size |
Gregory's Server
@spreadmastodon@mastodon.social @jdp23 @mike @spreadmastodon@venera.social @fediversereport
“what still ensures high capacity in an objective way. Up for suggestions to those numbers.”
I’m probably just dense, but I’m not grocking why there needs to be an arbitrary number of users to define high capacity. There are sites that report metrics on the uptime of instances, which seems to be a better measure than number of users.