> The issue they are having is moderation, not technical costs. This is the same issue sites like Reddit have. In the article, they even mention that private social media sites use moderation centres from poor countries. That is abhorrent. Not sure why you are advocating for this?

You go an admit that you haven't read the article and then you knowingly make a strawman argument saying I support "social media sites using moderation centres from poor countries"

Where did I even explicitly say I supported this? You just made that up and you know it.

The argument is about funding without ads, those that run hobbyist federated social media like Mastodon cannot use Ads or subscriptions, so they need to use donations (which is unsustainable)

Even if you throw in moderation, isn't even worth it if you're running a costly Mastodon instance and no donations are coming in.

> From my perspective, what is the point of continuing this conversation if you won't address an example in the past where my argument worked?

Because they simply don't work today and at scale. We have new problems today that didn't exist in the past.