Pawb.Social Feedback

6 readers

1 users here now

An official community for users of Pawb.Social services (furry.engineer, pawb.fun, and pawb.social) to provide feedback and suggestions.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

crashdoom@pawb.social

Join or ignore the anti-meta fedi pact (fedipact.online)

submitted 1 year ago by brodokk@pawb.social to c/pawbsocial_feedback@pawb.social

84 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This is a bit political but i feel this should be looked at. Whatever it's on on the Lemmy instance or the Mastodon instances.

My main concern is about the concept of Embrase Extend Extinguish they could use.

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

[–] crashdoom@pawb.social 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (31 children)

EDIT: I've gone ahead and posted this as an announcement on furry.engineer and pawb.fun. I'd strongly encourage our community, both here and on Mastodon please provide me with your opinions and thoughts.

Given it seems like it's predominantly blocking Meta's new "Project 92" initiative[1] which is an ActivityPub-based Twitter clone that could theoretically integrate with other services like Lemmy and Mastodon.

I'm personally against preemptively blocking them, despite my hatred for Facebook / Meta / whatever Mark Zuckerberg decides to call the company today. I may consider a silence action to avoid any excessive flooding / spamming of the federated timeline, especially if their rules don't align with ours on key topics, such as advertising and misinformation.

[–] Senil888@pawb.social 2 points 1 year ago

I mean, do we even know if Meta's plan involves federation? As others have stated, ActivityPub is an open standard that allows for federation, but services don't have to federate just to use ActivityPub. We could be getting into a fit right now just to find out they have no plans to federate - of course, they could change that at any time, but we just don't know yet.

Of course, Meta meeting with big instance admins is concerning, especially since they're under NDA so we don't know what was discussed. Maybe it was the possibility of federation, maybe it was just logistics of ActivityPub. They only started this in January, they could have figured they're at a point they should talk to the people who run this stuff.

IMO, we just don't have enough information to act yet, at least beyond "we are actively monitoring and prepared to make XYZ actions in response to ABC behaviors." Make it clear to the community what you're looking for and what you'll do in response to expected actions that are clear to all why they'd be acted on. I think a pre-emptive silence could be justified, but I think a full defederate is just really hard to argue for when we don't know a lot just yet.

Plus, love it or hate it, even if they do federate, Meta is a trusted entity by big names and organizations. A lot of people might give it a go, and it feels unfair to them. Especially for anyone interested in federation from the comfort of a known thing just to find out half the fediverse decided they want nothing to do with Meta's platform without seeing how it actually goes.

A small part of why I keep Twitter around (outside of artists and streamers who haven't made a presence here, at least as far as I know) is because I follow some local government orgs. I would love to get that on my local timeline so I have another reason to cut back on Twitter more, and Meta's platform might be the best way I can get that right now.

load more comments (30 replies)