XMPP Service Operators - 2026-09-02

> I've been considering a phone number verification service for MUCs I think that runs against the values of many xmpp users. Remember that phone numbers are tied to legal ID in many parts of the world ↺

Sure, but as an optional service not tied to a specific app like Quicksy it would be nice to have.

Luckily in xmpp no one forces you to use such things.

Although personally I think an optional phone number verification service makes more sense for account sign ups.

It is unlikely many people would use it to protect mucs

could use it for account signups too but that won't help with spam at all. So I think communities may also want it for protection like discord has a setting for that at the community level

I can see that it could be considered as an anti spam measure. But I also have the dejavu of the "new system" (xmpp in this case) gradually turning into the "old system" that was centred around phone numbers and that many people left

why not letting the admin chose between "email/sms/other means" ?

Of course it would be up to the community admins

best antispam is you must message me somehow. even if its via an anonymous method i find theres much less abuse when its not automated

if they can message you isn't that a spam vector?

i mean im everywhere, ive accepted im not going to seal all of that up

lol

> best antispam is you must message me somehow. even if its via an anonymous method i find theres much less abuse when its not automated what so message you for an account or? ↺

Age / ID verification will have a minimal impact on spam, yet a maximal impact on our dwindling privacy, and fair market access for any tech provider not already established. Spam is a problem, privacy invasion is, in my opinion, a terrible band-aid solution.

this isn't about "spam" in the classical sense, but mainly about ban evasion and harrassment.

and sure there are better options than phone number verification, but it can be one option that many people don't mind.

I absolutely understand the motivation. And naturally I would support an operator that wanted to employ some form of verification (ID/Phone) at their discretion. My concern would be a shift in the spirit of federated services, and subsequent adoption of protocols that move toward what email has become.

Has anyone tried making a new email account in todays age? Annoying, isn't it? Especially if you want to use an email service that doesn't have delivery issues with a number of services. It's not impossible to make an email without invading privacy but the level of effort required is higher than most spammers, harassers, and people with malicious intent would tolerate. Sure, temporary email services exist, but you can always filter those with ease. A decade or so ago, this would be a different story as emails could be made a lot easier. I find its a less invasive but great filter now.

I find it interesting that since Google, and Microsoft started pushing their business domain email products, we perfectly legitimate independent email operators find it increasingly difficult to deliver low volume legitimate user-solicited email to customers. I'm not suggesting that it's conspiratorial, but it doesn't look good that the "best" way to mitigate spam is to systemically interfere with their competitors ability to deliver email to users on their obscenely large platforms. Google/Microsoft: "Your email server doesn't send massive quantities of (potential spam) email? Too bad, your volume is too low to get an accurate signal, just to be safe, emails from your domain will be dropped beside everyone else selling fake Viagra. Of course we are happy to fix the problem we created, for the low low price of $asmuchaswecansqueezeyou/month. Your welcome." My experience with the modern email ecosystem has given me something like PTSD, I'd really hate to see a similar thing happen to XMPP services.

I concur, heavy emphasis on the "$asmuchaswecansqueezeyou/month." That's the thing that's keeping me at bay, it feels like every box in between me and my recipient has a price tag just to get precious access to port 25 Just to get started with my current ISP, the first thing I'd have to do is rent an IP from someone else, as they wont even let me. No amount of money besides "too much" is enough for them to let me do so.

and then I have to jump through hoops? No thank you. I'd much rather figure out how to get people onto open protocols, and where people generally _do_ consider what domain is behind their handle. It's more of a people problem, one that both Google and us face, and that they have a working solution for, greatly capitalizing on the very landscape they shaped.

jjj333_p [pain.agency]: is that how you manage signups ? What contact methods do you advertise for that ?