we estimate about <30% of matrix users are on matrix.org based on synapse phonehome stats.
the “unblocking” requests to abuse@matrix.org are to remove the servers with spambot accounts from the blocklists we publish as matrix.org; nothing to do with centralisation.
The first figure is lower than I'd have guessed, thanks for the correction.
As for the latter, that's immaterial—the more important it is to get server-to-server federation un-blocked with matrix.org, the more that can be taken as a sign of centralization. Moreover, if a large percentage of servers follow the Matrix.org blocklist, that's precisely the kind of centralized control the original poster was asking about.
(mind, none of this is intended as judgement, just clarifying why matrix.org would have substantial de facto "control" of the ecosystem & network, to use the original poster's word)
> the more important it is to get server-to-server federation un-blocked with matrix.org, the more that can be taken as a sign of centralization
This was my point. We never blocked server-to-server federation with matrix.org. We published a blocklist of the abusive servers, and blocked them from the rooms which we manage on the server. There was never any centralised control applied, and there is no mechanism to do so (unless room/server admins opt in to using the blocklists we publish, but they are very welcome to use their own).
the “unblocking” requests to abuse@matrix.org are to remove the servers with spambot accounts from the blocklists we publish as matrix.org; nothing to do with centralisation.