Unpopular, there will be that "one" server, offering the same services twitter does, where everyone flocks to, breaking the concept of the federated servers, because the audience wants one public plaza.
Because it filters out a large part of the federation concept defending noise, if you state this.
It prevents decentralization vs centralization discussions, which always results in developers missunderstanding "centralization of a social organism" like the state or society, as a externally forced upon evil instead of a choice by the majority. If that concept were really even contemplated, it would be discussed constructively, as in "how can we integrate moderation and distribution of costs and labour for a service provided by the public for the public".
I want to understand what you wrote there, but I honestly have no idea what you mean. I can't even work out whether you're addressing the Mastodon issue, or trying to justify writing "unpopular".
Its unpopular in the "going against the narrative of dezentralisation that spawned the platform" way, as its human nature to have social places to gossip like a village plaza, church or in this case, many servers. Likely outcome is thus, one official battlefield of opinion, and some smaller echo chamber servers depending on political leanings.
I'm not interested in your assertion of the popularity of that opinion, though. If you have data to _show_ it's unpopular, that would be interesting. Otherwise, let your opinion stand by itself, allowing other people comment and vote on it.
If Twitter had prepared an ActivityPub bridge and would activate it tomorrow, would Twitter remain the dominant player? Could they even expand their network to rival Youtube and Facebook?
