That's mistaking the map for the terrain. It's a networked system for leaving and retrieving messages. It's not a group of friends. The way you expect to migrate a messaging system is by moving the messages.

To confirm, I wish they would migrate posts, too, but I do not believe that the lack of that means that you cannot call it a migration.

However, your definition seems overly pedantic? It defines itself[0] as a social network with an emphasis on audience. Messaging is merely the method of interaction.

[Edit] "audience" is incorrect, I should've said "people"

0: https://joinmastodon.org/

A "social network" is a networked system for leaving and retrieving messages. Again, it is not a group of friends. It is a messaging system for a group of friends, just like a map is a graphical system for navigating a piece of terrain.

It seems as though you're putting emphasis on the wrong thing. Mastodon clearly believe the emphasis is on the _network_, as in, the people you follow and who follow you.

But I'm not entirely sure why you're arguing semantics with me. It can, by their definition, be considered migration.

> It seems as though you're putting emphasis on the wrong thing.

No, I'm just trying to be clear. If you can't move your messages in a messenger, you're not doing migration.

> It can, by their definition, be considered migration.

Their definition doesn't even require software. If they (and you) are trying to say that Mastodon is a group of friends, I'm going to beg to differ and say that it is a computer program that supports messaging.

edit: and why I'm going on an on about it? I'm clearly being persnickety, but because I think it's an important distinction, especially irt expectations that a user would have. The mystery for me is why you would insist that a messaging system that can't migrate messages has implemented migration.

You're not making a distinction, you're classifying it incorrectly. Containing a messaging component does not make it a messenger.

It's a social network, it clearly believes that the connections between people is the most important part of its offering. It can migrate a user and their connections.

Again, I would enjoy it if it did take posts, too, but clearly they disagree. I'm not going to say that they cannot claim it to be a migration as a result of that.

It's not a messenger, though. It's a social network.

And you can disagree with that, just as I do you.

Post migration still supports messaging.

Sorry, wait, also you're definition of social network is incorrect. It /is/ a group of friends. It's a network made up of social relationships.

Think of it like business networking, but for your friends. The connection itself is what matters.

That's what "social networking" is, but not what a "social networking website" is. Social networks don't require computers or websites.