I used to think that there would be 1, main 'Fediverse' with all of the 'big instances' connected to each other. The recent Threads debacle has shown me otherwise.

The point of the Fediverse is that there is no one single entity, or group of entities, dominating it all.

Right now it feels like whatever the big instances do, we kind of have to go along with to be a part of anything. As the Fediverse grows, there will be more options to suit different types of users.

I think it's fine if big instances federate with Threads and it's fine if they don't. People can just join instances that align with what they want. It's not like defederating means being cut out of the Fediverse, that's not possible.

Great design. I'm eager to see how it plays out.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] TORFdot0@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Just because Lemmy.world doesn’t agree with about defederating with meta doesn’t make them sell outs. Like you said, you are jumping ship; just like the fediverse intended.

For better or worse, Lemmy.world is intended to be a catch all instance for normies so it makes sense why they would not defederate from meta.

[–] GONADS125@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

I disagree that they aren't selling out.

I consider it to be as such when this move isn't supported by most of their userbase, they misframe that blocking Threads is a viable solution for the rampant issues with hate/extremism, and the decision puts their users at risk (both in the form of extremism/harassment and exploitation by Meta).

It's an inch towards becoming mainstream, but the costs outweigh the benefits IMO. I believe it's hypocritical to defederate from exploding heads and then turn around and federate with Threads.

I think misleading users into believing they can block Threads (only the posts), making a decision against the majority of their community's wishes, and instead subjecting them to potential harassment, misinformation and exploitation is selling out.

[–] MimicJar@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

You've mentioned that the majority of Lemmy.world users support defederating from threads. Do you have a source?

As someone in the "wait and see" group I'm curious how many people really are in each group.

[–] TORFdot0@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

If the majority of users on Lemmy.world does not want to be federated with meta then Lemmy.world will lose those users and then no longer be the power they currently are with influence over the fediverse.

Also I believe it’s disingenuous to equate explodingheads, which was defederated for being extremely toxic due to its lack of moderation and meta which presumably has more resources to devote to moderation than any fedi instance (of course they are still terrible at it)

I’m for defederating with meta when the time comes because I don’t think that their influence is healthy for the fediverse and don’t think that most admins could handle the burdens that would come with federating with them. Lemmy.world (and mastodon.social and a few others) is a big enough instance that they could handle those challenges. I’ve said before that if meta only sticks to the open source AP spec then the risks are much less and so that should be the criteria for federation

[–] CaptainSpaceman@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

woohoo! we got moderated content!!! cant wait for all the "organic" ads that pop up in my feed from users spouting the benefits of Tide^TM brand soap!!!!!

[–] ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

deleted by creator