> it's not a product in the traditional sense. It has completely different motives
If the motives aren’t engaging and delivering value to users, I’m not sure it has value beyond being a curiosity. If those are the motives, then it is a product. Not realising that is the classic trucks-versus-trains mistake. (Railroads didn’t initially see trucks as competition, because they were railroads, and trucks were trucks, while in reality, they were all freight. The railroads went bankrupt and were restructured.)
The economics definition of "product" is "an item offered for sale." Since we are on a forum for startups, most people are likely using this definition. By this definition, Mastodon is not a product. It is not for sale; it is a tool to be used and it is free software. The set of motives behind its creation and maintenance are completely different than something assembled with the intend of sale for profit.
So is my local church a product because they pass around a hat? You seem a little muddled, or maybe you just see everything in the world through a product lens, never taking off your marketer (or whatever) hat.
A highway is not a product, it's infrastructure. In the same way, Mastodon is infrastructure. If someone sells a Mastodon app, that's a product, just like someone selling traffic cones or a car is selling a product.
Not everything in the world is a product. We don't live in a world of products and the void.
If the motives aren’t engaging and delivering value to users, I’m not sure it has value beyond being a curiosity. If those are the motives, then it is a product. Not realising that is the classic trucks-versus-trains mistake. (Railroads didn’t initially see trucks as competition, because they were railroads, and trucks were trucks, while in reality, they were all freight. The railroads went bankrupt and were restructured.)