CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1Social Media and PoliticsMedia and Digital CommunicationBlockchain Technology Applications and Security

Seeing the Politics of Decentralized Social Media Protocols

Open access
Oshinowo, Tolulope, Hwang, Sohyeon, Zhang, Amy X., Monroy-Hernández, Andrés·2026·Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
DOI 10.1145/3816995
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Calls to decentralize feed-based social media have been driven by concerns about the concentrated power of centralized platforms and their societal impact. In response, numerous decentralized social media protocols have emerged, each interpreting “decentralization” in a different way. We analyze four such protocols (ActivityPub, AT Protocol, Nostr, and Farcaster) drawing on protocol documentation, media coverage, direct usage, and semi-structured interviews with protocol developers and experts to situate each protocol within its socio-technical goals. To support this analysis, we develop a grounded lexicon that facilitates the description and comparison of analogous components across each protocol. With it, we show how each protocol distributes control over key components differently, shaping who holds power over critical aspects such as user identity, curation, and infrastructural ownership. By examining protocols as socio-technical artifacts, we show how they prioritize different values and make distinct trade-offs, providing CSCW researchers with a lens to more effectively evaluate and design future decentralized social media systems.

Verified 2026-10-06 · 56 references not checked yet

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This paper develops a grounded lexicon to compare how four decentralized social media protocols—ActivityPub, AT Protocol, Nostr, and Farcaster—operationalize decentralization differently. It argues that protocol design is political, distributing power over identity, curation, and infrastructure in ways that create distinct trade-offs between user agency, accessibility, consistency, and re-centralization.

Key findings

  • The authors introduce a lexicon of four architectural components (Clients, Spaces, Servers, Aggregators) and six interaction components (Actions, Feeds, Space Storage, Identity Storage, Space Curators, Personal Curators) to compare protocols systematically.
  • Protocols distribute power differently: ActivityPub and AT Protocol centralize identity management at the server level for accessibility, while Nostr and Farcaster require user-managed keys or wallets, increasing sovereignty but also barriers such as irreversible key loss and, for Farcaster, roughly $5 to register an identity.
  • Curation varies: ActivityPub and Nostr distribute moderation across independent servers and clients, producing pluralism but inconsistent standards; AT Protocol and Farcaster concentrate curatorial power at the client layer, risking de facto re-centralization, though AT Protocol’s aggregator/relay and modular moderation partially distribute authority.
  • Infrastructure barriers shape re-centralization: ActivityPub and Nostr allow easier space creation (e.g., pre-packaged Mastodon/Pixelfed; tens of thousands of ActivityPub servers; approximately 8.7k active Mastodon instances as of January 2026), but network effects favor visible instances; AT Protocol and Farcaster require costly servers/aggregators, leaving actors like Bluesky PBC and the Farcaster team with outsized influence.

Methods

  • Inductive, iterative development of a grounded lexicon using protocol documentation, white papers, media coverage from outlets such as The Verge, WIRED, Forbes, and TechCrunch, plus sustained use of implementations from April 2024 to April 2025 and weekly Zoom/Slack meetings.
  • Semi-structured interviews from September 2024 to April 2025 with 10 individuals embedded in decentralized social media ecosystems, grouped as Creators, Builders, and Generalists across the four protocols; interviews averaged 47 minutes via Zoom, and participants reviewed a draft lexicon.
  • Triangulation across documentation, press coverage, direct usage, and interviews to refine component boundaries and analyze power over identity, curation, and infrastructure.

Limitations

  • The paper states that focusing on four prominent protocols does not exhaust the broader design space, especially as systems evolve; the lexicon abstracts complex arrangements into discrete components and may obscure nuances, such as wide variation in ActivityPub server moderation.
  • The paper states that the approach is limited in capturing bottom-up or exogenous dynamics not anchored to specific components, such as influential politicians or crypto founders who may exert disproportionate influence regardless of protocol design.
  • The paper states that the limited interview pool may introduce selection bias; it also notes that sustained use was not a formal ethnographic study, with no systematic participant observation or field note collection.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3816995

Cites

56 of 120 references verified0 citation errors · 8 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

24 of 65 cited sources checked · 7 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisecitation

    Decentralized social media protocols-particularly those designed for feed-based networking-are political artifacts that allocate power in real-time.

    “Similarly, decentralized social media protocols-particularly those designed for feed-based networking-are political artifacts that allocate power in real-time [55,63].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [55] source
    • cites [63] source

      The Abstract (page unavailable) describes ActivityPub as a protocol enabling decentralized social-media sites to communicate, and “Queering Technology by Accident” (page unavailable) says its design addresses safety, privacy, and moderation. These passages support the claim that protocol design has political consequences, but they do not establish the more specific claim about feed-based networking allocating power in real time. The “Control” section discusses real-time modulation in networks generally, not in decentralized social-media feeds. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Premisecitation

    Prior work on decentralized social media rarely considers how the underlying protocols structure and shape the systems being examined.

    “Focused on user experiences in the context of specific app implementations such as mastodon.socialand Bluesky [5,49,82,109,119], this work rarely considers how the underlying protocols structure and shape the systems being examined.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim4 of 5 sources checked
    • cites [5] source

      The Introduction describes a study focused on the Pleroma implementation, supporting the app-specific part of the citation. But it examines administrator actions rather than user experiences, and the Introduction and §2 explain how federation and the shared ActivityPub protocol shape cross-instance interaction and moderation. This paper alone also does not establish that prior work rarely considers protocols. (LLM, conf=0.82)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [49] source
    • cites [82] source

      The Abstract and Introduction describe a study of rules on Mastodon instances, not an analysis of how the underlying protocol shapes the system. However, the paper does discuss how Mastodon's federated structure affects governance and experiences across instances, so it is not an example of work that ignores system structure. It also cannot establish the broader claim that prior work rarely considers protocols. (LLM, conf=0.78)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [109] source

      The Abstract identifies this as a Mastodon case study of privacy policies and administrator experiences, so it supports the sentence’s example of research focused on a specific implementation. But §2, “Mastodon and the Fediverse: Background and Related Work” (page unavailable), discusses ActivityPub and how it enables different interaction models. The paper does not establish that prior work rarely considers how protocols shape decentralized social media. (LLM, conf=0.79)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [119] source
  • Premisecitation

    An alternative, decentralized paradigm for social media has emerged, primarily centered around protocols that seek to reconfigure how power is distributed across a network of actors.

    “In response, an alternative, decentralized paradigm for social media has emerged, primarily centered around protocols that seek to reconfigure how power is distributed across a network of actors [22,58,85].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim3 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [22] source

      The Introduction (page unavailable) describes the growth of decentralized social networks and says Mastodon lets communities independently manage servers connected through a common protocol. This supports the emergence of a decentralized alternative, but the paper does not characterize the broader paradigm as primarily centered on protocols designed to redistribute power across actors. (LLM, conf=0.82)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [58] source

      The Introduction (page unavailable) describes Mastodon as a decentralized alternative to Twitter, with a shared Activity Pub protocol connecting self-hosted servers that have distinct moderation policies. That supports the decentralized, protocol-based part of the claim, but the paper does not say that such protocols seek to reconfigure how power is distributed across actors. (LLM, conf=0.82)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [85] source

      The Introduction describes the Decentralized Web as an alternative to platforms controlled by a single organization, with independent instances that interact. Section 2.1.1 says ActivityPub connects those instances, and §2.2 says each Lemmy instance has its own rules and administrators. These passages support decentralized governance, but do not establish that the paradigm is primarily centered on protocols designed to redistribute power. (LLM, conf=0.78)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Interpretationcitation

    Protocols make key decisions about how to decentralize that are likely to give rise to dynamics documented in recent empirical work, such as challenges faced by admins of ActivityPub-based social networks.

    “We suggest that protocols make key decisions about how to decentralize that are likely to give rise to those dynamics documented in recent empirical work, such as challenges faced by admins of ActivityPub-based social networks [5,119] as they take on key roles as operators of Spaces, Servers, and Clients.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
  • Interpretationcitation

    Inconsistent moderation standards across implementations of ActivityPub and Nostr can result in new risks for harm, such as privacy violations.

    “Recent work on ActivityPub instances notes how inconsistent practices can result in new risks for harm, such as privacy violations [56].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
  • May combine two claims. 48
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 30
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Governance decisions in decentralized social media are typically made by instance administrators, who tend to be more responsive and accessible than executives of large, centrally-operated social media platforms during times of user dissatisfaction.

    “Governance decisions are typically made by instance administrators [5,32], who tend to be more responsive and accessible than the executives of large, centrally-operated social media platforms [4,56,119] during times of user dissatisfaction.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim3 of 5 sources checked
    • cites [5] source

      Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 1 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [32] source
    • cites [4]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [56] source

      Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [119] source

      Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Protocols aim to disseminate power to users, reduce reliance on centralized entities, and empower a rich ecosystem of interoperable social media services.

    “In this way, protocols aim to disseminate power to users, reduce reliance on centralized entities, and empower a rich ecosystem of interoperable social media services [47,63,75].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [47] source
    • cites [63] source

      The Abstract describes ActivityPub as enabling the Fediverse—social media sites that communicate with one another—and as offering an alternative to corporate social media. “Queering Technology by Accident” also describes it as a non-corporate social media system. These passages support interoperability and reduced reliance on corporate platforms for ActivityPub, but do not establish that protocols generally aim to distribute power to users. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [75]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Prior work on decentralized social media has often focused on user behavior within individual implementations of protocols-particularly mastodon.social-and frequently treats decentralization as a given or as a purely technical property.

    “Prior work on decentralized social media has often focused on user behavior within individual implementations of protocols-particularly mastodon.social-andfrequently treats decentralization as a given [15,22], or as a purely technical property.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [15] source
    • cites [22] source

      The Introduction describes Mastodon as a decentralized alternative to Twitter, treating its decentralization as a platform characteristic. But the Introduction and Discussion describe this paper as a study of migration across Mastodon instances, not user behavior within mastodon.social in particular. They also do not establish the broader claim about what prior work has often focused on. (LLM, conf=0.78)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Because Space curation is shared between Client and Server operators in ActivityPub and Nostr, the experience can become fragmented, at times increasing the risk of exposing users to content they find harmful or unwelcome.

    “Because Space curation is shared between Client and Server operators in these protocols, the experience can become fragmented, at times increasing the risk of exposing users to content they find harmful or unwelcome [56,109].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [56] source

      Section 6.1 (page unavailable) says differences in instance norms and federation can put users in the way of abusive behavior or content they do not want to see. Section 6.3 (page unavailable) also describes incompatible software and privacy protections across Fediverse instances. The copy does not establish that Space curation is shared between Client and Server operators in both ActivityPub and Nostr, or tie that arrangement to a fragmented experience; the Nostr-specific part is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.85)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [109] source

      The Introduction (section 1; page unavailable) says ActivityPub instances are independently governed and can have markedly different rules and user experiences. The Q30 discussion describes server-level moderation practices. Our copy does not establish that curation is shared between client and server operators in both ActivityPub and Nostr, or that fragmentation increases users’ exposure to harmful or unwelcome content. (LLM, conf=0.78)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Decentralizing power over infrastructure entails operating Clients, Servers, and Aggregators, imposing significant time, mental health, and financial costs on independent operators.

    “Finally, decentralizing power over infrastructure entails operating Clients, Servers, and Aggregators, imposing significant time, mental health, and financial costs on independent operators as noted in recent work [5,8,15,18,51].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 5 sources checked
    • cites [5] source

      The Introduction (page unavailable) says individuals or organisations can manage independent servers and that federation adds overhead for administrators. The Administrators section describes cumbersome day-to-day work. The paper does not establish mental-health or financial costs, or address operating Clients and Aggregators. (LLM, conf=0.87)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [8]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [15] source
    • cites [18] source
    • cites [51]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    In ActivityPub, independent Server administrators act as moderators, with significant discretion over local content policies and inter-server relationships.

    “In ActivityPub, independent Server administrators act as moderators, with significant discretion over local content policies and inter-server relationships [27,82].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [27] source
    • cites [82] source

      The Introduction and Background identifies Mastodon as a network of independent servers connected through ActivityPub. The Discussion and Future Work says instance administrators govern local rules and content moderation, and discusses how instances make defederation decisions. These passages support the claim for Mastodon instances, but the paper does not establish it for ActivityPub servers generally; no page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Some protocols concede a degree of centralization in order to lower adoption barriers and attract users, while others follow a stricter vision of decentralization that maximizes user agency but potentially intimidates newcomers.

    “For example, some protocols concede a degree of centralization in order to lower adoption barriers and attract users, while others follow a stricter vision of decentralization that maximizes user agency but potentially intimidates newcomers.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingreasoning

    The paper develops a grounded lexicon that facilitates description and comparison of analogous components across each protocol.

    “To support analysis of the politics embedded in decentralized social media protocols, we develop a grounded lexicon: a set of analytic categories that provides a shared vocabulary for describing and comparing protocols within the domain of feed-based decentralized social media protocols.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Three issues cut across all four protocols: power over identity, power over curation, and power over infrastructure.

    “Finally, we use this analysis to surface three issues cutting across all four protocols: power over identity, power over curation, and power over infrastructure.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    In ActivityPub and AT Protocol, identity keys associated with Identity Storage typically reside within the Space Storage of a Server, so Server owners hold keys to authentication and recovery.

    “In ActivityPub and AT Protocol, the identity keys associated with Identity Storage typically reside within the Space Storage of a Server, which means that the Server owners-whoever that may be-hold the keys to authentication and recovery [96].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [96]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    To fully own an AT Protocol Space, one must run a Server and Client, as well as an independent Aggregator-a role often filled by Bluesky PBC.

    “To fully own an AT Protocol Space, one must run a Server and Client, as well as an independent Aggregator-a role often filled by Bluesky PBC.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Nostr and Farcaster separate identity even more, making Identity Storage independent.

    “Nostr and Farcaster separate identity even more, making Identity Storage independent.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Findingnone given

    ActivityPub and Nostr make it relatively easy for individuals to launch new Spaces, especially with software like Mastodon that bundles Clients and Servers.

    “ActivityPub and Nostr make it relatively easy for individuals to launch new Spaces, especially with software like Mastodon that bundles Clients and Servers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Losing identity keys in Nostr and Farcaster is irreversible; they cannot be retrieved by asking a Server admin.

    “However, this means that losing identity keys is irreversible; they cannot be retrieved by asking a Server admin.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Nostr leaves content decisions entirely to independent Server and Client operators, reflecting its minimal moderation stance in favor of user expression, which has led one of its Clients to be banned in China.

    “Nostr takes this even further by leaving content decisions entirely to independent Server and Client operators-reflecting its minimal moderation stance in favor of user expression, which has led one of its Clients to be banned in China [68].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [68]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    While Nostr takes a similar architectural approach to ActivityPub, it requires more technical knowledge to set up infrastructure like Clients and Servers, which do not often come bundled like with ActivityPub.

    “While Nostr takes a similar architectural approach, it requires more technical knowledge to set up infrastructure like Clients and Servers, which do not often come bundled like with ActivityPub [80,89].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [80]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [89]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    Operating an Aggregator for much of AT Protocol's history has been associated with considerable technical and financial burdens, leaving developers dependent on Bluesky PBC's infrastructure.

    “Operating an Aggregator for much of the protocol's history has been associated with considerable technical and financial burdens, leaving developers dependent on Bluesky PBC's infrastructure [81].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [81]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    With Farcaster, all Servers share data in the same standardized way and curatorial power is concentrated almost entirely at the Client level.

    “For example, with Farcaster, all Servers share data in the same standardized way and curatorial power is concentrated almost entirely at the Client level.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Farcaster appears simpler, requiring only a Client and Server, but each Server must handle full data replication and indexing, making the system similarly demanding.

    “Farcaster appears simpler, requiring only a Client and Server, but each Server must handle full data replication and indexing, making the system similarly demanding.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingnone given

    Identity Storage is often tied to the Space Storage infrastructure across the four decentralized protocols.

    “Note Identity Storage is often tied to the Space Storage infrastructure.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    Across the four decentralized protocols, Personal Curators are typically defined at the Client-level.

    “*Additionally, across the four protocols, Personal Curators are typically defined at the Client-level.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    Nostr and Farcaster have Space-like concepts without specific names.

    “Note that Nostr and Farcaster have Space-like concepts without specific names.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Protocols function as socio-technical artifacts; they encode distinct goals and values as they operationalize decentralization in materially different ways.

    “However, protocols function as socio-technical artifacts; they encode distinct goals and values [114] as they operationalize “decentralization” in materially different ways.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [114]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Research in this area remains limited both because protocols in the domain of social media are relatively new and because they use abstracted and specialized terminology that can be difficult to compare.

    “Yet, research in this area remains limited both because protocols in the domain of social media are relatively new and because they use abstracted and specialized terminology that can be difficult to compare.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    These protocol-level issues shape core aspects of collaborative social life, including how users maintain identity and trust, how attention and visibility are structured across feeds, and how authority is distributed between users and administrators.

    “These protocol-level issues shape core aspects of collaborative social life, including how users maintain identity and trust, how attention and visibility are structured across feeds, and how authority is distributed between users and administrators.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Decentralization disperses power away from any single actor, which can mitigate prioritizing business interests over user welfare.

    “First, decentralization disperses power away from any single actor, which can mitigate prioritizing business interests (i.e., of corporate platform developers) over user welfare [28,31,86,120].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [28]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [31]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [86] source
    • cites [120]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Protocols serve as shared standards that distribute control by decoupling core network functionality from any single provider.

    “In a 2019 essay, Masnick [75] laid out compelling rationales for this shift: whereas platforms embody centralization, protocols serve as shared standards that distribute control by decoupling core network functionality from any single provider [75].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [75]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The unique arrangement of socio-technical components outlined by each protocol reflects the particular priorities of the developers, who appear to make different trade-offs accordingly.

    “Drawing on protocol documentation, media coverage, and semi-structured interviews with protocol developers and experts, we examine how the unique arrangement of socio-technical components outlined by each protocol reflects the particular priorities of the developers, who appear to make different trade-offs accordingly.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The method draws from established approaches in infrastructure studies and STS, particularly the tradition of socio-technical analysis, which stresses the interrelationship between technical design decisions and political, social, and cultural outcomes.

    “This method draws from established approaches in infrastructure studies and STS, particularly the tradition of socio-technical analysis, which stresses the interrelationship between technical design decisions and political, social, and cultural outcomes [e.g., 46,57,106,107].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [46] source
    • cites [57] source
    • cites [106] source
    • cites [107] source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    While some users benefit from greater agency-especially as admins of their own networks-decentralization can also lead to fragmentation, inconsistency in moderation practices, and new forms of exclusion or unequal access.

    “While some users benefit from greater agency-especially as admins of their own networks-this can also lead to fragmentation, inconsistency in moderation practices, and new forms of exclusion or unequal access.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    Evaluating protocols is challenging because they consist of abstract rule sets that users rarely encounter directly and often use inconsistent terminology for similar concepts, complicating comparison.

    “Evaluating protocols is challenging because they consist of abstract rule sets that users rarely encounter directly and often use inconsistent terminology for similar concepts, complicating comparison.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductown data

    The authors' engagement with social networks was not a formal ethnographic study-there was no systematic participant observation or field note collection-but it provided ethnographic-style insights that helped identify key components and understand how design choices impacted governance and power dynamics.

    “Although this engagement was not a formal ethnographic study-there was no systematic participant observation or field note collection-it provided us with ethnographic-style insights that helped us identify key components for our lexicon and better understand how design choices impacted governance and power dynamics within each protocol.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductown data

    The authors stress-tested the evolving lexicon through meetings, ensuring that the proposed components could cohesively describe the diverse designs of the protocols under study.

    “We stress-tested the evolving lexicon through these meetings, ensuring that the proposed components could cohesively describe the diverse designs of the protocols under study.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Designing protocols requires navigating complex trade-offs among competing values, goals, and technical constraints, which makes careful evaluation of protocols essential for guiding future systems toward their intended social and technical outcomes.

    “Designing protocols requires navigating complex trade-offs among competing values, goals, and technical constraints, which makes careful evaluation of protocols essential for guiding future systems toward their intended social and technical outcomes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    A key promise of decentralization in feed-based social media is the diffusion of governance and moderation responsibilities, allowing individual communities to tailor rules and enforcement mechanisms to their specific needs.

    “A key promise of decentralization in feed-based social media is the diffusion of governance and moderation responsibilities [40,48,84,91], allowing individual communities to tailor rules and enforcement mechanisms to their specific needs [47].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 5 sources checked
    • cites [40]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [48]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [84]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [91]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [47] source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductreasoning

    Candidates were grouped into three archetypes-Creators, Builders, and Generalists-to ensure balanced coverage across expertise and the four protocols.

    “As the shortlist expanded, candidates were grouped into three archetypes-Creators, Builders, and Generalists-to ensure balanced coverage across expertise and the four protocols.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Our work reframes decentralization as a contested and situated outcome of protocol design.

    “Our work reframes decentralization as a contested and situated outcome of protocol design.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Users of Nostr and Farcaster are not dependent on any single Server to validate their presence in a Space, and can switch Servers without losing their social identity.

    “Users are not dependent on any single Server to validate their presence in a Space, and they can switch Servers without losing their social identity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    The feedback received from interviews directly shaped the evolution of the lexicon by helping reconcile tensions between each protocol's stated goals as articulated in documentation, their public framing in press coverage, and the authors' own observations from sustained usage.

    “The feedback we received from interviews directly shaped the evolution of our lexicon by helping us reconcile tensions between each protocol's stated goals as articulated in documentation, their public framing in press coverage, and our own observations from sustained usage.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    This arrangement makes account access simple but renders users vulnerable to Server failure, policy shifts, or unilateral bans.

    “This makes account access simple, but also renders users vulnerable to Server failure, policy shifts, or unilateral bans.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    While power over identity and curation largely reflects explicit design choices, power over infrastructure exposes a gap between protocol ideals and practice, driven by material and economic constraints.

    “Our analysis highlights this distinction: while power over identity and curation largely reflects explicit design choices, power over infrastructure exposes a gap between protocol ideals and practice, driven by material and economic constraints.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    What decentralization looks like-and should look like-in social media is still under contention.

    “More broadly, as each protocol makes different trade-offs, we underscore that what decentralization looks like-and should look like-in social media is still under contention.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    For both Farcaster and AT Protocol, the concentration of power over curation around Clients can result in de facto re-centralization, alongside a more consistent experience of content curation.

    “For both Farcaster and AT Protocol, the concentration of power over curation around Clients can result in de facto re-centralization, alongside a more consistent experience of content curation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Protocols are not merely technical infrastructures but normative visions, shaping participation, labor, and governance.

    “In this sense, protocols are not merely technical infrastructures but normative visions, shaping participation, labor, and governance.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Decentralized social media protocols are formally sets of rules, but when implemented they become tangible socio-technical artifacts that encode particular values, priorities, and forms of decisionmaking.

    “Decentralized social media protocols are formally sets of rules, but when implemented they become tangible socio-technical artifacts that encode particular values, priorities, and forms of decisionmaking.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    Triangulating between protocol documentation, public perception, and the authors' observations enabled them to establish a lexicon that captures decentralized social media protocols as political infrastructures-systems in which design decisions distribute power, privilege certain actors, and encode values that shape how governance and participation unfold in practice.

    “Triangulating between these sources enabled us to establish a lexicon that captures decentralized social media protocols as political infrastructures-systems in which design decisions distribute power, privilege certain actors, and encode values that shape how governance and participation unfold in practice.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    ActivityPub and AT Protocol centralize identity management by storing user identity keys on Servers, relieving users of key maintenance but granting Server operators substantial influence over broader Spaces.

    “Protocols like ActivityPub and AT Protocol centralize identity management by storing user identity keys on Servers, relieving users of the burden of key maintenance, but also granting Server operators substantial influence over the broader Spaces.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Running a Farcaster Server or AT Protocol Aggregator requires substantial technical and financial investment, preventing decentralization of power over infrastructure in practice.

    “Meanwhile, running a Farcaster Server or AT Protocol Aggregator requires substantial technical and financial investment, preventing decentralization of power over infrastructure in practice.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    ActivityPub and AT Protocol embed a politics of accessibility and legibility, privileging adoption through familiar account workflows.

    “ActivityPub and AT Protocol embed a politics of accessibility and legibility, privileging adoption through familiar account workflows”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    When ownership and responsibility for Identity Storage is separated from the Server, everyday users have more power over identity but must have sufficient technical knowledge to do so well.

    “When ownership and responsibility for Identity Storage is separated from the Server, everyday users have more power over identity-but must have sufficient technical knowledge to do so, and well.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Resource and knowledge constraints lead most users to join existing Spaces, and ActivityPub and Nostr see dominance by a few highly-visible instances-such as mastodon.social or Damus-that become central points in the network.

    “However, resource and knowledge constraints lead most users to join existing Spaces, and the two protocols see dominance by a few highly-visible instances-such as mastodon.socialor Damus-that become central points in the network.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    AT Protocol and Farcaster consolidate curatorial authority at the client layer, embedding a politics of scale and uniformity.

    “AT Protocol and Farcaster consolidate curatorial authority at the client layer, embedding a politics of scale and uniformity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The lexicon abstracts complex arrangements into discrete components, enabling systematic comparison but potentially obscuring important nuances.

    “More fundamentally, the lexicon abstracts complex arrangements into discrete components, enabling systematic comparison but potentially obscuring important nuances.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductreasoning

    The limited pool of interviewees may introduce some selection bias, but the prominence and expertise of participants provided a rich and diverse set of perspectives on the protocols.

    “While the limited pool may introduce some selection bias, the prominence and expertise of participants provided a rich and diverse set of perspectives on the protocols.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    Farcaster and AT Protocol face risks of re-centralization due to one component (the Client) having curatorial power, although AT Protocol has begun to enable curation through other components as well.

    “Ultimately, Farcaster and AT Protocol face risks of re-centralization due to one component (the Client) having curatorial power, although AT Protocol has begun to enable curation through other components as well.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    ActivityPub and Nostr offer a more decentralized and pluralistic approach by distributing power over curation to independently run Clients and Servers, but introduce challenges around coordination and consistency.

    “Meanwhile, while ActivityPub and Nostr offer a more decentralized and pluralistic approach by distributing power over curation to independently run Clients and Servers, they also introduce challenges around coordination and consistency.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Faced with a huge number of possible Spaces to join, users often gravitate toward the most visible or active Spaces, which gain traction because of network effects.

    “Faced with a huge number of possible Spaces to join, users often gravitate toward the most visible or active Spaces, which gain traction because of network effects.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    Semi-structured interviews played a pivotal role in refining and grounding the authors' interpretations.

    “As our lexicon took shape, semi-structured interviews (Appendix 4) played a pivotal role in refining and grounding our interpretations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    Our focus on four prominent protocols captures a range of contemporary approaches to decentralization but does not exhaust the broader design space of protocols generally, particularly as systems evolve.

    “Our focus on four prominent protocols-ActivityPub, AT Protocol, Nostr, and Farcaster-captures a range of contemporary approaches to decentralization but does not exhaust the broader design space of protocols generally, particularly as systems evolve.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The lexicon supports both retrospective and prospective analysis by helping researchers assess outcomes after moments of failure and by providing a foundation for anticipating risks and evaluating design trade-offs.

    “In this way, our lexicon supports both retrospective and prospective analysis by helping researchers assess outcomes after moments of failure, or by providing a foundation for anticipating risks and evaluating design trade-offs.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Farcaster uses Optimism, a layer-2 blockchain built on top of Ethereum, designed to increase scalability and lower transaction costs for decentralized applications.

    “Farcaster uses Optimism (https://optimistic.etherscan.io/), a layer-2 blockchain built on top of Ethereum (https://etherscan.io/),designed to increase scalability and lower transaction costs for decentralized applications.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites https://optimistic.etherscan.io/

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites https://etherscan.io/

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    How decentralized social media protocols are implemented in practice can give rise to unanticipated dynamics.

    “At the same time, how protocols are implemented in practice can give rise to unanticipated dynamics.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Decentralized social media protocol design is inherently political, shaping the rules of online life.

    “Moving beyond binary framings of “centralized vs. decentralized, ” we argue that decentralized social media protocol design is inherently political, shaping the rules of online life.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The lexicon provides a foundation for future efforts to map how decentralized social media protocol components interact, trace unintended consequences, and surface gaps between protocol design and practice.

    “The lexicon presented in this work provides a foundation for future efforts to map how decentralized social media protocol components interact, trace unintended consequences, and surface gaps between protocol design and practice.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
64 of 64

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The four protocols (ActivityPub, AT Protocol, Nostr, and Farcaster) have achieved the most significant mainstream traction and represent a substantial part of the ecosystem in terms of adoption and developer activity.

    “Although many decentralized social media protocols exist [55,63], we focused our analysis on the four, introduced below, that have achieved the most significant mainstream traction as of writing.”
    “These protocols represent a substantial part of the ecosystem in terms of adoption and developer activity, making them both theoretically relevant and practically impactful.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Many decentralized social media protocols have emerged in response to the concentration of power observed by centralized platforms.

    “While many decentralized social media protocols have emerged in response to the concentration of power observed by centralized platforms, they vary in the values they encode and the trade-offs they make in operationalizing decentralization.”
2 of 2

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Star and Ruhleder are attributed to the wrong reference

    Minor

    The sentence attributes the cited work to Star and Ruhleder, but reference [106] lists Star alone. Their coauthored work is listed as reference [107].

1 of 1

Cites

  • The Ethnography of Infrastructure

    STAR, S. L. (1999) · American Behavioral Scientist · doi:10.1177/00027649921955326 · Cited by 4,486 · cited 7× · see citing works

    “:3 as sites where social order and governance are materially organized [106, 107].”
    Influential

  • The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information

    Pasquale, F. (2015) · doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674736061 · Cited by 3,796 · see citing works

  • Steps toward an ecology of infrastructure: Design and access for large information spaces

    Star, S. L., & Ruhleder, K. (1996) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.7.1.111 · Cited by 3,238 · cited 2× · see citing works

    “This method draws from established approaches in infrastructure studies and STS, particularly the tradition of socio-technical analysis, which stresses the interrelationship between technical design decisions and political, social, and cultural outcomes [e.g., 46, 57, 106, 107].”

  • The politics of ‘platforms’

    Gillespie, T. (2010) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444809342738 · Cited by 2,522 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “Prior work has shown how such platforms embed particular distributions of power through design choices around moderation, algorithmic feeds, and visibility [e.g., 20, 30, 37, 50].”

  • Technology affordances

    Gaver, W. W. (1991) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems Reaching through technology - CHI '91 · doi:10.1145/108844.108856 · Cited by 1,536 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “This method draws from established approaches in infrastructure studies and STS, particularly the tradition of socio-technical analysis, which stresses the interrelationship between technical design decisions and political, social, and cultural outcomes [e.g., 46, 57, 106, 107].”

  • #Gamergate and The Fappening: How Reddit’s algorithm, governance, and culture support toxic technocultures

    Massanari, A. (2017) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444815608807 · Cited by 1,264 · cited 3× · see citing works

    “Studies show how algorithmic feeds and moderation filters not only play a substantial role in user interaction and behavior [19, 37, 71, 76], but can also perpetuate societal biases (e.g., concerning social identity groups) [34].”

  • Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1

    Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., Masinter, L., Leach, P., & Berners-Lee, T. (1999) · doi:10.17487/rfc2616 · Cited by 1,218 · see citing works

  • Value-sensitive design

    Friedman, B. (1996) · Interactions · doi:10.1145/242485.242493 · Cited by 966 · see citing works

  • Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Content Moderation, and the Hidden Decisions That Shape Social Media

    Gillespie, T. (2019) · doi:10.12987/9780300235029 · Cited by 806 · see citing works

  • What is a flag for? Social media reporting tools and the vocabulary of complaint

    Crawford, K., & Gillespie, T. (2016) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444814543163 · Cited by 496 · cited 3× · see citing works

    “For example, Crawford and Gillespie [30] argue that user “flagging” tools give platforms rhetorical cover for moderation decisions, while concealing the underlying negotiations around content removal [62, 72].”

  • Platform governance at the margins: Social media creators’ experiences with algorithmic (in)visibility

    Duffy, B., & Meisner, C. (2022) · Media, Culture & Society · doi:10.1177/01634437221111923 · Cited by 358 · cited 3× · see citing works

    “Popular feed-based platforms—like Instagram, TikTok, and 𝕏 (formerly Twitter)—have collectively shaped digital experiences for billions of people, while raising concerns about privacy [17, 77], power imbalances [37], and algorithmic biases [34, 71].”

  • Human-Machine Collaboration for Content Regulation: The Case of Reddit Automoderator

    Jhaver, S., Birman, I., Gilbert, E., & Bruckman, A. (2019) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3338243 · Cited by 289 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “Researchers have developed interventions aimed at redistributing control toward users, their peers, and their communities [59–61, 118 ], taking value-sensitive In response, researchers, designers, and technologists have increasingly looked toward protocols as an alternative foundation for social…”

  • Tiered Governance and Demonetization: The Shifting Terms of Labor and Compensation in the Platform Economy

    Caplan, R., & Gillespie, T. (2020) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/2056305120936636 · Cited by 283 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “Prior work has shown how such platforms embed particular distributions of power through design choices around moderation, algorithmic feeds, and visibility [e.g., 20, 30, 37, 50].”

  • Online Harassment and Content Moderation: The Case of Blocklists

    Jhaver, S., Ghoshal, S., Bruckman, A., & Gilbert, E. (2018) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3185593 · Cited by 270 · see citing works

  • Classification and Its Consequences for Online Harassment: Design Insights from HeartMob

    Blackwell, L., Dimond, J., Schoenebeck, S., & Lampe, C. (2017) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3134659 · Cited by 245 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “…space, we encourage HCI and STS scholars—particularly those at CSCW—as well as builders and designers, to engage more deliberately with the values and politics encoded in decentralized infrastructures, asking not only how to decentralize, but for whom, to what ends, and at what costs [9, 112, 115].”

  • Isomorphism through algorithms: Institutional dependencies in the case of Facebook

    Caplan, R., & Boyd, D. (2018) · Big Data & Society · doi:10.1177/2053951718757253 · Cited by 231 · cited 2× · see citing works

    “Studies show how algorithmic feeds and moderation filters not only play a substantial role in user interaction and behavior [19, 37, 71, 76], but can also perpetuate societal biases (e.g., concerning social identity groups) [34].”

  • Understanding infrastructure: History, heuristics and cyberinfrastructure policy

    Jackson, S. J., Edwards, P. N., Bowker, G. C., & Knobel, C. P. (2007) · First Monday · doi:10.5210/fm.v12i6.1904 · Cited by 215 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “This method draws from established approaches in infrastructure studies and STS, particularly the tradition of socio-technical analysis, which stresses the interrelationship between technical design decisions and political, social, and cultural outcomes [e.g., 46, 57, 106, 107].”

  • Laboratories of Oligarchy? How the Iron Law Extends to Peer Production

    Shaw, A., & Hill, B. M. (2014) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/jcom.12082 · Cited by 208 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “For instance, studies show that admins on decentralized social media networks often do not tailor privacy policies and instead use default text [109], leading to patterns of isomorphism seen in many other online contexts [102].”

  • Fighting Hate Speech, Silencing Drag Queens? Artificial Intelligence in Content Moderation and Risks to LGBTQ Voices Online

    Oliva, T. D., Antonialli, D. M., & Gomes, A. (2020) · Sexuality & Culture · doi:10.1007/s12119-020-09790-w · Cited by 201 · cited 3× · see citing works

    “Popular feed-based platforms—like Instagram, TikTok, and 𝕏 (formerly Twitter)—have collectively shaped digital experiences for billions of people, while raising concerns about privacy [17, 77], power imbalances [37], and algorithmic biases [34, 71].”

  • Identifying Women's Experiences With and Strategies for Mitigating Negative Effects of Online Harassment

    Jessica Vitak, B., Chadha, K., Steiner, L., & Ashktorab, Z. (2017) · ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1145/2998181.2998337 · Cited by 181 · see citing works

  • The Stuff of Bits: An Essay on the Materialities of Information

    Dourish, P. (2017) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/10999.001.0001 · Cited by 132 · see citing works

  • Challenges in the Decentralised Web: The Mastodon Case

    Raman, A., Joglekar, S., Cristofaro, E. D., Sastry, N., & Tyson, G. (2019) · Proceedings of the Internet Measurement Conference · doi:10.1145/3355369.3355572 · Cited by 118 · cited 2× · see citing works

    “As decentralized networks scale, infrastructure and content-driven pressures can push social networks back toward centralized control to address challenges related to cost, performance, and user experience [95].”

  • Managing privacy boundaries together: Exploring individual and group privacy management strategies in Facebook

    De Wolf, R., Willaert, K., & Pierson, J. (2014) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.010 · Cited by 113 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “Governance decisions are typically made by instance administrators [5, 32], who tend to be more responsive and accessible than the executives of large, centrally-operated social media platforms [4, 56, 119] during times of user dissatisfaction.”

  • Modeling Self-Disclosure in Social Networking Sites

    Wang, Y., Burke, M., & Kraut, R. E. (2016) · ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1145/2818048.2820010 · Cited by 110 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “…space, we encourage HCI and STS scholars—particularly those at CSCW—as well as builders and designers, to engage more deliberately with the values and politics encoded in decentralized infrastructures, asking not only how to decentralize, but for whom, to what ends, and at what costs [9, 112, 115].”

  • Personalizing Content Moderation on Social Media: User Perspectives on Moderation Choices, Interface Design, and Labor

    Jhaver, S., Zhang, A. Q., Chen, Q. Z., Natarajan, N., Wang, R., & Zhang, A. X. (2023) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3610080 · Cited by 97 · cited 2× · see citing works

    “For example, Crawford and Gillespie [30] argue that user “flagging” tools give platforms rhetorical cover for moderation decisions, while concealing the underlying negotiations around content removal [62, 72].”
    Self-citation

  • The Case for Alternative Social Media

    Gehl, R. W. (2015) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/2056305115604338 · Cited by 96 · cited 3× · see citing works

    “In this way, protocols aim to disseminate power to users, reduce reliance on centralized entities, and empower a rich ecosystem of interoperable social media services [47, 63, 75].”

  • Algorithmic Authority

    Lustig, C., Pine, K., Nardi, B. A., Irani, L. C., Lee, M. K., Nafus, D., & Sandvig, C. (2016) · CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/2851581.2886426 · Cited by 83 · cited 3× · see citing works

    “Popular feed-based platforms—like Instagram, TikTok, and 𝕏 (formerly Twitter)—have collectively shaped digital experiences for billions of people, while raising concerns about privacy [17, 77], power imbalances [37], and algorithmic biases [34, 71].”

  • Squadbox

    Mahar, K., Zhang, A. X., & Karger, D. R. (2018) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3173574.3174160 · Cited by 80 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “For example, Crawford and Gillespie [30] argue that user “flagging” tools give platforms rhetorical cover for moderation decisions, while concealing the underlying negotiations around content removal [62, 72].”
    Self-citation

  • PolicyKit: Building Governance in Online Communities

    Zhang, A. X., Hugh, G., & Bernstein, M. S. (2020) · ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST) · doi:10.1145/3379337.3415858 · Cited by 76 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “Researchers have developed interventions aimed at redistributing control toward users, their peers, and their communities [59–61, 118 ], taking value-sensitive In response, researchers, designers, and technologists have increasingly looked toward protocols as an alternative foundation for social…”
    Self-citation

  • Designing Word Filter Tools for Creator-led Comment Moderation

    Jhaver, S., Chen, Q. Z., Knauss, D., & Zhang, A. X. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3517505 · Cited by 72 · see citing works

    Self-citation

  • Give Social Network Users the Privacy They Want

    Wisniewski, P., Islam, A. K. M. N., Knijnenburg, B., & Patil, S. (2015) · Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work · doi:10.1145/2675133.2675256 · Cited by 68 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “…space, we encourage HCI and STS scholars—particularly those at CSCW—as well as builders and designers, to engage more deliberately with the values and politics encoded in decentralized infrastructures, asking not only how to decentralize, but for whom, to what ends, and at what costs [9, 112, 115].”

  • The digital covenant: non-centralized platform governance on the mastodon social network

    Gehl, R. W., & Zulli, D. (2023) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2022.2147400 · Cited by 51 · cited 3× · see citing works

    “Focused on user experiences in the context of specific app implementations such as mastodon.social and Bluesky [5, 49, 82, 109, 119], this work rarely considers how the underlying protocols structure and shape the systems being examined.”

  • Flocking to Mastodon: Tracking the Great Twitter Migration

    He, J., Zia, H. B., Castro, I., Raman, A., Sastry, N., & Gareth Tyson, A. (2023) · ACM Internet Measurement Conference (IMC) · doi:10.1145/3618257.3624819 · Cited by 51 · cited 2× · see citing works

    “Prior work has focused on moments of mass migration from centralized, feed-based platforms [22, 52, 58, 85], as well as privacy, safety, and trust challenges that emerge in decentralized settings [29, 56, 65].”

  • Drivers of social influence in the Twitter migration to Mastodon

    Cava, L. L., Aiello, L. M., & Tagarelli, A. (2023) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-48200-7 · Cited by 48 · cited 3× · see citing works

    “Prior work has focused on moments of mass migration from centralized, feed-based platforms [22, 52, 58, 85], as well as privacy, safety, and trust challenges that emerge in decentralized settings [29, 56, 65].”

  • Exploring Platform Migration Patterns between Twitter and Mastodon: A User Behavior Study

    Jeong, U., Sheth, P., Tahir, A., Alatawi, F., Bernard, H. R., & Liu, H. (2024) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v18i1.31348 · Cited by 34 · see citing works

  • Will Admins Cope? Decentralized Moderation in the Fediverse

    Anaobi, I. H., Raman, A., Castro, I., Zia, H. B., Ibosiola, D., & Tyson, G. (2023) · Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2023 · doi:10.1145/3543507.3583487 · Cited by 33 · cited 19× · see citing works

    “• Builders: Individuals implementing social networks built using a given decentralized social media protocol, such as mastodon.social for ActivityPub, or Bluesky for AT Protocol.”
    Influential

  • Online Harassment in Majority Contexts: Examining Harms and Remedies across Countries

    Schoenebeck, S. Y., Batool, A., Do, G., Darling, S., Grill, G., Wilkinson, D., Khan, M., Toyama, K., & Ashwell, L. (2023) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581020 · Cited by 33 · see citing works

  • A comparative study of Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP), Post Office Protocol (POP) and X.400 Electronic Mail Protocols

    Tzerefos, P., Smythe, C., Stergiou, I., et al. (2002) · Conference on Local Computer Networks · doi:10.1109/lcn.1997.631025 · Cited by 28 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “Infrastructural studies have long recognized that protocols like HTTP [42, 45], SMTP [110], and ARPANET [35] are not just technical standards but also enablers and constraints of action, shaping cultural norms and social practices as infrastructure [106].”

  • Form-From: A Design Space of Social Media Systems

    Zhang, A. X., Bernstein, M. S., Karger, D. R., et al. (2024) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3641006 · Cited by 23 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “Such questions have been especially salient in feed-based platforms [117] such as Instagram and TikTok, where a core part of the user experience is an algorithmic feed maintained by a centralized operator.”
    Self-citation

  • "Taking Care of a Fruit Tree": Nurturing as a Layer of Concern in Online Community Moderation

    Yu, B., Seering, J., Spiel, K., & Watts, L. (2020) · Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3334480.3383009 · Cited by 22 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “Decentralizing power over curation similarly disperses responsibility for filtering and contextualizing content across multiple actors, creating challenges and uneven enforcement discussed in Yu et al. [116], Zhang et al. [119] and Nicholson et al. [82].”

  • The Future of Platform Power: Making Middleware Work

    Keller, D. (2021) · Journal of democracy · doi:10.1353/jod.2021.0043 · Cited by 20 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “In this sense, decentralization encourages innovation in the tools and technologies built for social media [64, 75].”

  • Showing your ass on Mastodon: Lossy distribution, hashtag activism, and public scrutiny on federated, feral social media

    Dunbar-Hester, C. (2024) · First Monday · doi:10.5210/fm.v29i3.13367 · Cited by 19 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “Much of this literature centers on whether decentralized, protocol-based systems can meaningfully increase user agency [38], documenting community policies, administrative practices, and recurring concerns about the re-concentration of power [55, 95].”

  • An Exploration of Decentralized Moderation on Mastodon

    Bono, C. A., La Cava, L., Luceri, L., & Pierri, F. (2024) · ACM Web Science Conference · doi:10.1145/3614419.3644016 · Cited by 18 · cited 2× · see citing works

    “Prior work on decentralized social media has often focused on user behavior within individual implementations of protocols—particularly mastodon.social —and frequently treats decentralization as a given [15, 22], or as a purely technical property.”

  • Mastodon Rules: Characterizing Formal Rules on Popular Mastodon Instances

    Nicholson, M. N., Keegan, B. C., & Fiesler, C. (2023) · Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing · doi:10.1145/3584931.3606970 · Cited by 18 · cited 3× · see citing works

    “Focused on user experiences in the context of specific app implementations such as mastodon.social and Bluesky [5, 49, 82, 109, 119], this work rarely considers how the underlying protocols structure and shape the systems being examined.”

  • Trouble in Paradise? Understanding Mastodon Admin's Motivations, Experiences, and Challenges Running Decentralised Social Media

    Zhang, Z., Zhao, J., Wang, G., Johnston, S.-K., Chalhoub, G., Ross, T., Liu, D., Tinsman, C., Zhao, R., Van Kleek, M., et al. (2024) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3687059 · Cited by 16 · cited 7× · see citing works

    “Governance decisions are typically made by instance administrators [5, 32], who tend to be more responsive and accessible than the executives of large, centrally-operated social media platforms [4, 56, 119] during times of user dissatisfaction.”
    Influential

  • Decentralized social networks and the future of free speech online

    Huang, T. (2024) · Computer Law & Security Review · doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2024.106059 · Cited by 15 · see citing works

  • Internal Fractures: The Competing Logics of Social Media Platforms

    Christin, A., Bernstein, M. S., Hancock, J. T., Jia, C., Mado, M., Tsai, J. L., & Xu, C. (2024) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/20563051241274668 · Cited by 15 · see citing works

  • Blue Skies from (X?s) Pain: A Digital Forensic Analysis of Threads and Bluesky

    Brown, J., Onik, A. R., & Baggili, I. (2024) · Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security · doi:10.1145/3664476.3670904 · Cited by 10 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “Finally, decentralizing power over infrastructure entails operating Clients, Servers, and Aggregators, imposing significant time, mental health, and financial costs on independent operators as noted in recent work [5, 8, 15, 18, 51].”

  • Not The Internet, but This Internet: How Othernets Illuminate Our Feudal Internet

    Dourish, P. (2015) · Aarhus Series on Human Centered Computing · doi:10.7146/aahcc.v1i1.21200 · Cited by 10 · cited 3× · see citing works

    “Dourish’s account of “othernets” [35] is instructive here, illustrating how alternative networking arrangements give rise to distinct social and political possibilities and challenge the apparent inevitability of dominant infrastructural forms.”

  • Understanding Decentralized Social Feed Curation on Mastodon

    Liu, Y., Song, E., Zhang, O. X., Merriman, J., Zhang, L., & Monroy‐Hernández, A. (2025) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3757688 · Cited by 5 · cited 1× · see citing works

    “Each Server can define its own Space Curator [e.g., 4, 119], and users interact through a corresponding Client that surfaces Feeds curated by both Space-wide filters and user-specific Personal Curators [69, 104].”
    Self-citation

  • Privacy Policies on the Fediverse: A Case Study of Mastodon Instances

    Tosch, E., Garcia, L., Li, C., & Martens, C. (2024) · Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies · doi:10.56553/popets-2024-0138 · Cited by 4 · cited 4× · see citing works

    “Focused on user experiences in the context of specific app implementations such as mastodon.social and Bluesky [5, 49, 82, 109, 119], this work rarely considers how the underlying protocols structure and shape the systems being examined.”
    Influential

  • Trust and Friction: Negotiating How Information Flows through Decentralized Social Media

    Hwang, S., Nanayakkara, P., & Shvartzshnaider, Y. (2025) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3757516 · Cited by 4 · cited 5× · see citing works

    “Prior work has focused on moments of mass migration from centralized, feed-based platforms [22, 52, 58, 85], as well as privacy, safety, and trust challenges that emerge in decentralized settings [29, 56, 65].”
    InfluentialSelf-citation

  • User Sentiments and Dynamics in the Decentralized Web: Reddit Migration’s Impact on Lemmy

    Nunes, T. A. (2023) · Journal of Multimedia Information System · doi:10.33851/jmis.2023.10.4.333 · Cited by 3 · cited 2× · see citing works

    “Prior work has focused on moments of mass migration from centralized, feed-based platforms [22, 52, 58, 85], as well as privacy, safety, and trust challenges that emerge in decentralized settings [29, 56, 65].”

  • The Effects of Group Sanctions on Participation and Toxicity: Quasi-experimental Evidence from the Fediverse

    Colglazier, C., TeBlunthuis, N., & Shaw, A. (2024) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v18i1.31316 · Cited by 3 · see citing works

  • IF NOT, ELSE: STANDARDS, PROTOCOLS, NETWORKS AND HOW THEY MAKE A DIFFERENCE

    Karppi, T., Paris, B., Gehl, R. W., Cath, C., & Myers West, S. (2023) · AoIR Selected Papers of Internet Research · doi:10.5210/spir.v2023i0.13525 · Cited by 3 · see citing works

  • Trust and Safety Risks and Engineering Patterns Through the Lens of Issue Resolution: An Empirical Case Study in Mastodon and DiasporaPreprint

    Cramer, G., Maxam, W. P., & Davis, J. C. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4768911

  • Untitled work

    (n.d.) · doi:10.5555/975052

    Unresolved

  • IPFS (Ed.). 2022. Bluesky and IPLD - Jay Graber. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGbBZbl-V8Y

    (2022)

    Unresolved

  • Bitcoin Magazine (Ed.). 2023. The NOSTR Protocol. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQjzxIKBsTY

    Bitcoin, M. (2023)

    Unresolved

  • a16z. 2024. A16z/Awesome-Farcaster. a16z. https://github.com/a16z/awesome-farcaster

    (2024)

    Unresolved

  • I. H. Anaobi. 2023. Improving Content Moderation in the Fediverse. https://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/97538

    (n.d.)

    Unresolved

  • ATProto. 2025. Self-Hosting. AT Protocol. https://atproto.com/guides/self-hosting

    (2025)

    Unresolved

  • Backlinko. 2024. Number of Threads Users in August 2024. Backlinko. https://backlinko.com/threads-users

    (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Jan Niklas Bingemann. 2024. A Kantian Right to Fediverse Access or: for a digital enlightenment on the social web. https://philarchive.org/rec/BINAKR

    (n.d.)

    Unresolved

  • BlueSky. 2023. Why Are Blocks on Bluesky Public? | Bluesky. BlueSky. https://docs.bsky.app/blog/block-implementation

    (2023)

    Unresolved

  • BlueSky. 2024. Bluesky’s Moderation Architecture | Bluesky. https://docs.bsky.app/blog/blueskys-moderation-architecture

    (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Bluesky. 2024. Bluesky’s Stackable Approach to Moderation. Bluesky. https://bsky.social/about/blog/03-12-2024-stackable-moderation

    (2024)

    Unresolved

  • BlueSky. 2025. Federation Architecture | Bluesky. BlueSky - Advanced Guides - Federation Architecture. https://docs.bsky.app/docs/advanced-guides/federation-architecture

    (2025)

    Unresolved

  • bnewbold.net. 2024. Notes on Running a Full-Network Atproto Relay (July 2024) | Bryan Newbold. https://whtwnd.com/bnewbold.net/entries/Notes%20on%20Running%20a%20Full-Network%20atproto%20Relay%20(July%202024)

    (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Marie Boran. 2024. Is Elon Musk’s X User Exodus Real? Newsweek. https://www.newsweek.com/how-top-twitter-rivals-fared-since-elon-musk-exodus-1984404

    Marie, B. (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Jenn Brice. 2024. How to Stop LinkedIn, Facebook, and Instagram from Hoovering up Your Data to Train Their AI. Fortune. https://fortune.com/2024/09/23/linkedin-facebook-instagram-tiktok-data-ai-training/

    Jenn, B. (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Michael del Castillo. 2023. Meet @Fiatjaf, The Mysterious Nostr Creator Who Has Lured 18 Million Users And $5 Million From Jack Dorsey. https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2023/05/30/bitcoin-social-network-nostr-creator-fiatjaf-/ Section: Forbes Digital Assets.

    del, C. M. (2023)

    Unresolved

  • Kyle Chayka. 2025. Bluesky’s Quest to Build Nontoxic Social Media. The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2025/04/14/blueskys-quest-to-build-nontoxic-social-media

    Kyle, C. (2025)

    Unresolved

  • Jason Cohen. 2022. What Is Truth Social? All You Need to Know About Donald Trump’s Social Network. PCMAG. https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/what-is-truth-social-donald-trumps-social-network-explained

    Jason, C. (2022)

    Unresolved

  • Cindy Cohn and Rory Mir. 2022. The Fediverse Could Be Awesome (If We Don’t Screw It up). Electronic Frontier Foundation. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/11/fediverse-could-be-awesome-if-we-dont-screw-it

    Cindy, C. (2022)

    Unresolved

  • European Commission. 2024. How the Digital Services Act Enhances Transparency Online. European Commission - Shaping Europe’s digital future. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/dsa-brings-transparency

    Commission European (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Skip De Mönnink. 2024. From Network to Platform to Protocol: Mastodon’s Ethos and the Sociotechnical Imaginary of the Fediverse. https://studenttheses.uu.nl/handle/20.500.12932/46353

    (n.d.)

    Unresolved

  • Brianna Honkawa d’Estries. 2023. Primal Secures $1 Million Seed Round To Fuel Bitcoin-Infused Nostr Apps. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2023/07/12/primal-secures-1-million-seed-round-to-fuel-bitcoin-infused-nostr-apps/

    Honkawa, D. B. (2023)

    Unresolved

  • Farcaster. 2024. Architecture / Farcaster Docs. https://docs.farcaster.xyz/learn/architecture/overview

    (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Farcaster. 2024. Getting Started / Farcaster Docs. https://docs.farcaster.xyz/learn/

    (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Farcaster. 2024. Scaling Farcaster · Farcasterxyz/Protocol · Discussion #163. GitHub. https://github.com/farcasterxyz/protocol/discussions/163

    (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Mario Gabriele. 2024. The Future of Farcaster with Dan Romero | The Generalist. https://www.generalist.com/briefing/the-future-of-farcaster-with-dan-romero

    Mario, G. (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Robert W. Gehl. 2023. ActivityPub, the Non-Standard Standard. FOSS Academic. https://fossacademic.tech/2023/10/15/APnonStandard.html

    Gehl Robert, W. (2023)

    Unresolved

  • Martin Hering. 2023. How I Ran My Own Mastodon Server in 10 Minutes - Martin Hering - Blog. Martin Hering Blog. https://martinhering.me/post/run-your-own-mastodon-server

    Martin, H. (2023)

    Unresolved

  • Logan Hitchcock. 2026. Ethereum’s Vitalik Buterin Going All-In on Decentralized Social Media as Farcaster Lens Change Hands. https://decrypt.co/355335/ethereum-vitalik-buterin-decentralized-social-media-farcaster-lens-change-hands Section: News.

    (n.d.)

    Unresolved

  • Lea Laux László Erdődi and Kai Selgrad. 2023. Trust as the Elephant in the Room: Security Evaluation of Decentralized Online Social Networks with Mastodon. Norsk IKT-konferanse for forskning og utdanning 2023 3 (2023) 16. Issue 3. https://www.ntnu.no/ojs/index.php/nikt/article/view/5653

    (n.d.)

    Unresolved

  • Christine Lemmer-Webber. 2021. ActivityPub Rocks!https://activitypub.rocks/

    Christine, L.-W. (2021)

    Unresolved

  • Christine Lemmer-Webber, Jessica Tallon, Erin Shepherd, Amy Guy, and Evan Prodromou. 2018. ActivityPub (W3C Recommendation 23 January 2018). https://www.w3.org/TR/activitypub/

    Christine, L.-W. (2018)

    Unresolved

  • Rita Liao. 2023. Damus Pulled from Apple’s App Store in China after Two Days. TechCrunch. https://techcrunch.com/2023/02/02/damus-pulled-from-apples-app-store-in-china-after-two-days/

    Rita, L. (2023)

    Unresolved

  • Ingrid Lunden. 2022. How Mastodon Is Scaling amid the Twitter Exodus. TechCrunch. https://techcrunch.com/2022/12/23/how-mastodon-is-scaling-amid-the-twitter-exodus/

    Ingrid, L. (2022)

    Unresolved

  • Aymeric Mansoux and Roel Rocsam Abbing. 2020. Seven Theses on the Fediverse and the Becoming of Floss. In The Eternal Network: The Ends and Becomings of Network Culture, Kristoffer Gansing and Inga Luchs (Eds.). Institute of Network Cultures and transmediale e.V.

    Aymeric, M. (2020)

    Unresolved

  • Nico Mara-McKay. 2025. Bluesky’s CEO Meltdown: How Leadership Continues to Fail Its Most Marginalized Users. Medium. https://plutopsyche.medium.com/blueskys-ceo-meltdown-how-leadership-continues-to-fail-its-most-marginalized-users-8bfa7a8824b4

    Nico, M.-M. (2025)

    Unresolved

  • Mike Masnick. 2019. Protocols, Not Platforms: A Technological Approach to Free Speech. Knight First Amendment Institute. http://knightcolumbia.org/content/protocols-not-platforms-a-technological-approach-to-free-speech

    Mike, M. (2019)

    Unresolved

  • Cecily Mauran. 2024. Meta Is Using Your Posts to Train AI. It’s Not Easy to Opt Out. Mashable. https://mashable.com/article/meta-using-posts-train-ai-opt-out

    Cecily, M. (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Bryan Metzger. 2023. Democratic lawmakers are having a blast on ’Bluesky ’ the latest alternative to Twitter. https://www.businessinsider.com/democrats-bluesky-aoc-garcia-wyden-schatz-frost-twitter-2023-5

    (n.d.)

    Unresolved

  • Cindy Cohn and Rory Mir. 2023. FBI Seizure of Mastodon Server Data Is a Wakeup Call to Fediverse Users and Hosts to Protect Their Users. Electronic Frontier Foundation. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/07/fbi-seizure-mastodon-server-wakeup-call-fediverse-users-and-hosts-protect-their

    Rory, M. C. C. A. (2023)

    Unresolved

  • André Neves. 2022. How to Setup a Paid Nostr Relay. https://andreneves.xyz/p/how-to-setup-a-paid-nostr-relay

    André, N. (2022)

    Unresolved

  • Bryan Newbold. 2024. Reply on Bluesky and Decentralization | Bryan Newbold. https://whtwnd.com/bnewbold.net/3lbvbtqrg5t2t

    Bryan, N. (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Helen Nissenbaum. 1999. Can Trust Be Secured Online? A Theoretical Perspective. Etica e Politica (1999). Issue No. 2.

    (n.d.)

    Unresolved

  • Nostr. 2024. Nostr, a Simple Protocol for Decentralizing Social Media That Has a Chance of Working. https://nostr.com/#what-is-nostr

    (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Jay Peters. 2023. How Reddit Crushed the Biggest Protest in Its History. The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/23779477/reddit-protest-blackouts-crushed

    Jay, P. (2023)

    Unresolved

  • pluja. 2025. NOSTR Is a Protocol That Many Things Can Be Built Upon. Use Nostr. https://usenostr.org/#accounts

    (2025)

    Unresolved

  • pluja. 2025. Setting up a Nostr Relay. Use Nostr. https://usenostr.org/relay

    (2025)

    Unresolved

  • Evan Prodromou. 2024. ActivityPub: Programming for the Social Web (first edition ed.). O’Reilly Media, Inc.

    Evan, P. (2024)

    Unresolved

  • AT Protocol. 2024. AT Protocol - Homepage. AT Protocol - Homepage. https://atproto.com/

    Protocol, A. T. (2024)

    Unresolved

  • AT Protocol. 2024. AT Protocol - Specs. AT Protocol - Specs. https://atproto.com/specs/atp

    Protocol, A. T. (2024)

    Unresolved

  • AT Protocol. 2025. Atproto Ethos. AT Protocol. https://atproto.com/articles/atproto-ethos

    Protocol, A. T. (2025)

    Unresolved

  • AT Protocol. 2025. Glossary of Terms. AT Protocol. https://atproto.com/guides/glossary#pds-personal-data-server

    Protocol, A. T. (2025)

    Unresolved

  • Adi Robertson. 2022. Twitter’s Open-Source Offshoot Bluesky Releases First Experiment - The Verge. https://www.theverge.com/2022/5/4/23057473/twitter-bluesky-adx-release-open-source-decentralized-social-network

    Adi, R. (2022)

    Unresolved

  • Dustin Rowles. 2025. The Bluesky Waffles Controversy Explained. Pajiba. https://www.pajiba.com/news/the-bluesky-waffles-controversy-explained.php

    Dustin, R. (2025)

    Unresolved

  • Ben Bergman Russell, Melia. 2025. X Competitor Bluesky Is Being Valued at around $700 Million in a New Funding Round after Explosive Growth in the Wake of Trump’s Victory. Business Insider. https://www.businessinsider.com/x-competitor-bluesky-valuation-new-funding-round-2025-1

    Melia Ben Bergman Russell (2025)

    Unresolved

  • Hank Sanders. 2024. So You’re Thinking of Leaving X for Bluesky. How Does It Work? The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/21/technology/bluesky-social-media.html

    Hank, S. (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Hunter Schwarz. 2024. The Website Tracks How Fast Bluesky Is Growing in near Real Time. Fast Company. https://www.fastcompany.com/91230935/the-website-tracks-how-fast-bluesky-is-growing-in-near-real-time

    Hunter, S. (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Ian Sherr. 2023. Twitter, Who? Flipboard Adds Mastodon Features, Pushing Further Into Social Networking - CNET. https://www.cnet.com/news/twitter-who-flipboard-adds-mastodon-features-pushing-further-into-social-networking/

    Ian, S. (2023)

    Unresolved

  • Amanda Silberling. 2023. A Beginner’s Guide to Mastodon, the Open Source Twitter Alternative. TechCrunch. https://techcrunch.com/2023/07/24/what-is-mastodon/

    Amanda, S. (2023)

    Unresolved

  • Amanda Silberling. 2024. Farcaster, a Crypto-Based Social Network, Raised $150M with Just 80K Daily Users. TechCrunch. https://techcrunch.com/2024/05/21/farcaster-a-crypto-based-social-network-raised-150m-with-just-80k-daily-users/

    Amanda, S. (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Kyle Torpey. 2023. Here’s Why Bitcoiners Are Flocking to Nostr. Fortune Crypto. https://fortune.com/crypto/2023/02/21/bitcoiners-flocking-to-nostr-social-network-jack-dorsey-edward-snowden/

    Kyle, T. (2023)

    Unresolved

  • Gary Weinstein. 2024. From Control To Community: Farcaster And The Future Of Social Media. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2024/11/04/from-control-to-community-farcaster-and-the-future-of-social-media/

    Gary, W. (2024)

    Unresolved

  • Langdon Winner. 1980. Do Artifacts Have Politics? Daedalus 109 (1980) 121–136. Issue 1 - Modern Technology: Problem or Opportunity?. jstor:20024652https://www.jstor.org/stable/20024652

    (n.d.)

    Unresolved

  • Ethan Zuckerman. 2022. Could Internet Culture Be Different? The New York Review of Books 69 (2022). https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2022/06/09/could-internet-culture-be-different-the-modem-world-driscoll/

    (n.d.)

    Unresolved

Flagged first, then by citations

64 of the 120 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Oshinowo, T., Hwang, S., Zhang, A. X., & Monroy-Hernández, A.
Affiliations
  • Princeton University (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • Princeton University
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
Published
2026-09-23
Volume
10
Issue
6
Pages
1-27
ISSN
2573-0142 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1145/3816995
OpenAlex
W4416608679
Cited by
1
References
120
Citations by year
2026: 1
FWCI
14.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Blockchain Technology Applications and Security
Keywords
decentralized social media, power distribution, user identity, content curation, value trade-offs

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-06.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-06.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review