@VictorVenema @RARohde @icesheetmike @FrankSonntag @steve I think most of the people weren't upset about the signup page, but instead the followup email, which makes it sound like a peer reviewed pub in the last 5 years is a hard requirement, when it seems from your policy that isn't the case. So you might add a sentence to that email that other forms of participation qualify.

@VictorVenema @RARohde @icesheetmike @FrankSonntag @steve Looking back to my time as a young, unpublished undergrad/grad student, the convos I had with senior researchers where they talked to me as peers are the ones thay really helped me realize I too could do this. Hope there could be a way to word the requirements to make it clear to those who may unjustly see themselves as impostors based on that bad review on first paper, that they also qualify for your noble server.

@VictorVenema @RARohde @icesheetmike @FrankSonntag @steve I'll take a look. I'd wonder about the people who closed it without signing up, thinking incorrectly they didn't qualify

For what it's worth, I think some of the disgruntled posters on Twitter were looking for a reason not to join and seized on this to try to convince others, which is their prerogative

@VictorVenema @FrankSonntag yeah, unfortunately I don't think some of those people are acting in good faith. They have large follower bases on Twitter and want to maintain them, and see Mastodon as a threat. So they will use the evidence they have to undermine you and scare other users away. I think Twitter and Mastodon can be complementary and coexist, but they see it as zero sum.

@VictorVenema @Ruth_Mottram I had no idea! That's ridiculous

@VictorVenema the clout chasers are not really thriving here.