GreenFediverse: Difference between revisions

While building up our own database we would like to get more knowledge by critical research and make it available to everyone. This relates very specifically to knowledge about the energy use of server operators. Through our script we already receive a first status of all registered Fediverse instances from the GreenWebFoundation. However, since we had to realize that not all companies and server operators are transparent with a statement about the use of renewable energy and partly even do greenwashing, we would like to complement this status with a qualitative and transparent research. This information collected by the community is for each server operator, technically all domain names, AS numbers or IP addresses are collected and added to the list. For this purpose [https://digitalcourage.social/@aligyie nieebel] already collected a lot of information and put it together in a selfmade [https://lite.framacalc.org/green-webhost-ranking ranking]. This information about the use of renewable energy is also collected for our list in separate .md - files. In these text files the collective research is written in text, offer links to information pages and certificate files. Categorized as "[https://framagit.org/greenfediverse/green-instances/-/tree/master/additional-info additional infos]", "[https://framagit.org/greenfediverse/green-instances/-/tree/master/rejectlist rejectlist]" or as a manually set "[https://framagit.org/greenfediverse/green-instances/-/tree/master/whitelist whitelist]", will then be added to the Green Instances List under "background information". Servers marked as "rejected" are those that, based on our research, are contrary to the GreenWebFoundation's status. Since a downgrade rating comes into play here, the quality and validity of the collected information is critical to rejecting a status. Because server operators who claim to use renewable energies, but at the same time and by other means invest in fossil energies, cannot in our view make an ecologically sustainable contribution and are destroying their acquired status themselves - we do this in order to bring more reality, transparency and quality into play. More simply: unfortunately, we have to remain suspicious. Finally, we refrain from an exact and hardly realizable rating, because a lot of factors have to be considered and cannot be read out technically yet.

You can use and implement the script as you like - feel free to experiment with it. [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/deed.en (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)]