Self-hosting is an advanced topic, and it could alienate non-technical readers if one of the first things they see under Recommendations is really advanced.
That makes sense to me.
I personally cant even get WebDAV to work 
I considered this when I first started the PR for adding the Self-Hosting category, but Jonah provided an explanation here that I’m satisfied with.
Ultimately my largest issue from before is the categorization of self-hosting tools as advanced, which is a label we currently reserve more for targeted/specific threat models. On the other hand, we should be encouraging self-hosting by anyone who is capable of self-hosting, so these topics should be far more broadly applicable to readers than the typical advanced recommendations.
Moving this page above the recommendations category hierarchy entirely […] makes the most sense to me, because this page is highly duplicative of many existing pages we have.
We do emphasize this in the introduction to the Self-Hosting index, which would be the first thing readers see when they click that section:
Self-hosting your own solutions requires advanced technical knowledge and a deep understanding of the associated risks. By becoming the host for yourself and possibly others, you take on responsibilities you might not otherwise have. Self-hosting privacy software improperly can leave you worse off than using e.g. an end-to-end encrypted service provider, so it is best avoided if you are not already comfortable doing so.
To specify, advanced threat models often require solutions that most people don’t need.
As much as I am personally more in favor of adding content to the advanced section, our current selections can still help explain this fact. For example, the “Alternative Networks” section features discussion of the Tor and i2p networks, which most folks won’t need to use if their daily usage involves banking and secure messaging. Similarly, “Device Integrity” is useful for those facing advanced malware attacks.
1 Like