Crossposting this incase of takedown. Hope this isn't breaking the rules.
Edit: I cannot confirm if the Original OP is telling the truth or lying, figured I wanted more people to see this so you can decide for yourselves who to believe.
Don't belive me? Ask them.
Fosstodon admins were at least transparent and shared with their community when they were approached by meta for an off the record meeting, which was awesome. They also declined that meeting and shared screenshots of them doing so.
But lemmy.world admins won't tell you that at least one of them accepted that same meeting request. Why won't they say that?
Tell your community that you accepted a meeting with meta. Thats not wrong in and of itself, but I feel it is shady/not right when you're communicating about a wait-and-see approach, while having meetings with the company in question yet not being transparent about it.
@ruud@lemmy.world care to comment?
Also, I'm spinning up my own instance because I don't trust this platform to folks who aren't transparent. Don't ask me to join, it's going to be just for me for now. I don't even know that I have time to admin an instance, but my trust is wearing thin based on the facts at hand. So, it's what I'm doing.
All that matters about the OPs claim is that the admins need to say they aren't contracted with meta, but they haven't, which is damning evidence that they have signed at least one contract with Meta.
It's simple logic.
Then reliable absolute silence about being contracted or not with Meta. Followed of course by mass downvotes when it makes no sense to do so.
See all the bots saying the same silly responses over and over about no evidence, then massively downvoting people who are clearly rational.