Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That's the solution to many of the decentralization problems; invite-only.

But people WANT the chance of winning the "lottery" as it were, and going viral.

You're not doing that in your small discord or private mastodon.



I completely understand and agree with their incentives. Those with the public instances will play the winning/losing lottery, losing being not managing the troll automated induced bad content fast enough. I encourage anyone taking on this challenge to first and foremost get some trustworthy non-toxic non-power-tripping moderators around the world for the "follow the sun" management of the instances.


Creating scarcity in access will lead to shared accounts, account re-sale, hacking, takeovers – all the classical account management problems.


Some of those will exist no matter what (Twitter accounts are unlimited and still sold) but - limited to invite only doesn't need to mean "limited as in scarce" - there's no reason to share an account if you can just invite the person, instead.


I've managed closed Fb group for ten years now. For new members we have a voting system in place. Inviting wouldn't work because if members could invite whoever they choose it will sooner or later lead to having members that not everybody is comfortable with. A friend of my friend may not necessarily be my friend. It'll create friction and lead to all sorts of interpersonal problems and soon enough it's not a peaceful community anymore, people start to block each other or lash out in comments just because their personalities or beliefs clash. I don't believe in invites anymore.

Google Wave and Googl+ also had invite system, it didn't work out well. Gmail is exception to the rule I'd say.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: