this post was submitted on 21 May 2026
34 points (82.7% liked)
Fediverse
42805 readers
207 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, Mbin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm trying to think how you could set up a charter, like through a corporation. Or partnership, might be a way to legally rotate who holds the liability. Basically, rotate the C suite and board of directors every time the effective ownership/control of the instance changes. Probably have to do some filings, but since it's not publicly traded those filings just need to be with your accountant?
NOTE I am two vodkas and three joints deep this is probably bad advice
No I think that's the best way to do it. Strongly depends on the country you're in, what kind of legal constructs it allows, but having some organization that's in the contract instead of some person is the way to go. That org can then handle votings etc (can even use the instance for that).
Noooo high me is supposed to give bad advice I have trained him that way. I woke up and am sober (wrll, for me) and am so disappointed in him
I am completely sober but the Idea I got is more insane than yours.
The trust thing basically cannot work for me. It's not only expensive, but I don't think it's a good idea to operate a social media trust from my jurisdiction( India ). So if anyone wants to go forward with trusts, it must be someone from Europe not me.
The idea I have, which honestly sounds crazy, but may be the only way individual owners can run these instances, is the idea of mutually assured destruction. Basically, why, despite having nukes, have we not used them yet? Because nuclear attack means both the partners will mutually assured destruction.
Similarly, if I give admins and server owner both the power to delete the server, with admins having to vote a simple majority in order to do so, it basically creates a mutually assured destruction scenario, where both have to co-operate.