(a short bonus post because I need an example of a Leaflet post with an image embedding as a heading, and figured I might as well write something)

Sebastian Vogelsang, whose the developer of Flashes and working on the commons moderation service for Eurosky posted a very interesting question this week which got me thinking.

The idea behind the Eurosky commons moderation service is as follows:

  • Developers can register their apps with Eurosky.

  • Eurosky acts as the endpoint where participating apps can send content reports.

  • Eurosky then provides moderation decisions that can be shared across apps using the same lexicon.

So far, so good. But the problem is that not all apps are the same. Vogelsang makes a distinction between consumer apps and producer apps. The distinction is simple:

  • Producer apps are predominantly used to create content.

  • Consumer apps are predominantly used to consume content.

For Vogelsang and the Eurosky team the question is: how should the costs of running the commons moderation layer be split across all participating apps, and should there be a distinction between the different types of apps?

I think thats a good question, and I don't yet have a clear answer to that.

But for me, this distinction between producer and consumer apps has been stuck in my mind for the last few days.

The current social networking era of the Big Tech platforms sees everyone use the same app to access a platform. Musk uses the same X app when he posts 150 times per day as any rando who just wants to scroll their feed. Same with TikTok, Insta, etc, the power users who are responsible for creating the content use the same app to access the network as the lurker who follows 3 people and scrolls for 5 minutes a week.

Social media is well known to follow a power law curve regarding how content on the network is created and consumed. As a rule of thumb, most networks follow a 1-9-90 split, with 1% of people creating original content, 9% occasionally contributing and 90% lurking.

It is one of the quirks of how the current Big Tech platforms work that these very different groups of people all use the same app to access the platform. It is clear that their experience, use case and needs are extremely different. For example, notification management is an absolute must if you are a creator with a big account (and even then it's often a mess), but for a lurker this matters much less. A lurker prioritises good feeds that gives them the content they are looking for. Also important for some creators, but other big accounts often don't have the time to read through feeds anyway so they only need the most relevant highlights.

The cool part of open social networks is that we get to move away from the paradigm of building the same app for very different types of people to access a network. Instead we can now build different apps that respect the needs of different groups of people.

However, what interests me about Vogelsang's post is that this also creates new challenges as a result. Should producer apps and consumer apps be treated different, when it comes to shared moderation costs, for example? Currently ATProto lexicon records do not indicate with which app a post was made. Apps could start adding a custom field to posts to indicate the source. Is that desirable? I don't know!

Only thing I do know is that you give people the freedom to build their own tools/apps/software, they might actually do that, and over time a network like atproto ends up much more diverse, stranger and unique as a result.