Fediverse

Of course it's their choice. But I also think some people in some situations should recognize a broader responsibility. Because we get into a larger question of, what happens when the public square is privately owned?

With a website like joinfediverse, that domain becomes a primary resource for people looking to get into decentralized platforms. By not including something, the maintainer is not just making the choice for himself but for every new user who visits the site. That responsibility should be taken seriously and the choice not just made based on personal opinion.

Think of it this way, imagine I made a site called whoshouldIvotefor.com and it would ask you questions and then recommend a political candidate. Sounds like a good idea, right? Now what if I make it so the site always recommends a Republican candidate, and only justifies why the answers you gave to the questions indicate that vote? I'm certainly allowed to do that. Free speech and all. But it could be argued that I also have a responsibility to the voters who come to my site who don't realize it is biased, in that I am pushing my personal opinions on them and causing them to make a decision that they wouldn't have made if they had all the facts.

(Disclaimer- I'm not a Republican, I consider myself liberal-libertarian. I'm using that as an example.)

I am just saying that a site which sets itself up as an authoritative on ramp to the fediverse should try to be unbiased and not based on personal opinions of its editor.