• STUPIDVIPGUY@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      being open to everything is not better though, and being open to meta specifically will threaten and lower the quality of the place. lemmy.world should defederate with threads

      • lemming007@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re in no position dictate what an instance should or should not do. If you don’t like what an instance is doing, you’re welcome to join another one or start your own, that’s the beauty of decentralization.

        • CaptObvious@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          As users, we have every right to express an opinion and to ask the admin to consider taking an action. As you say, if you don’t like it, join another instance.

          • lemming007@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Touche. Not dictating anything, just pointing out the obvious that when you sign up at an instance, the admin still has full control.

            Which is why we shouldn’t get instances grow too large as then we have the same issue as any centralized platform.

      • Someology@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Couldn’t a person just make the decision not to follow anything from Threads, though?

        • linearchaos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That won’t keep them from coming in here and antagonizing us, flooding our instances with spam and advertising.

    • DAC Protogen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I think one can be “open” to a fault. If you cling to principles and morale for the sake of it and without exception or nuance, you set yourself up to be exploited or worse. Many things, entities, interactions in life contradict each other and it is important to set boundaries and make decisions for yourself. Because life and people are multi-faceted and aren’t nice and clean and perfect, which blind, naive idealism fails to take into account. The keyword here is nuance.

      Many big tech companies run on greed and inhumane, unhealthy, invasive practices for the sake of pure, blind, unsustainable growth and profit. And I would argue that this is one of the driving factors of the fediverse even existing. If you don’t clearly separate yourself from these practices, then we all can simply use Reddit. But people create, maintain and use alternatives for a reason. Not taking a stance or action against what you want to escape from, even openly inviting it for the sake of being open and on a morally high horse makes simply no sense.

      Idealists won’t like to hear this, but it’s the same with peace. Look at Ukraine to have a recent example. Most people want to live and prosper in peace. That is natural and desirable. But there are always some, who profit from war and who try to destroy things, disregarding the fate of others. Or political systems that want to expand territory and exploit / convert whole populations. When the desire for peace is only one-sided, and all attempts of talking or peaceful incentives fail, you can either protect yourself forcefully or be stolen from, raped, tortured, deported or murdered, watching your homeland be turned into ashes and those you love suffer for decades from the consequences.

      In the same way, when the desire for openness, humane fairness without exploitation of users is one-sided, you have to draw a line and take a clear stance to defend that “safe space” you seeked in the first place from entities and principles that contradict it. And we have decades of clear evidence how big tech, especially Facebook / Meta operates, they are known to invade user privacy, strive for one-sided power, try everything to avoid or circumvent legal regulation. They have more than earned to be excluded from a place created to offer something better, healthier. And it’s not like we hurt feelings here, it’s a corporation, a virtual, soulless entity.

      I can only speak for myself and do what I deem is good for me, so I’ll migrate to Lemmy.ml, because at least they have the balls to stay true to a concept, even if it involves difficult or ugly decisions. And even if blocking Meta won’t fully “protect” the fediverse, at least it is a clear message and limits the amount of power they can achieve and the amount of damage they can do here.

      • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        My many years of experience on the Internet has taught me that once the unwashed hordes of the public show up and start slinging shit around, that’s when your website dies if you like having intelligent discourse on it.

    • Aux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Totally agree! Defeding Meta is a nail into Fediverse’s coffin. It just goes again all Fediverse principles.

    • WardPearce@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yea agree, not a fan of “Meta”. But I think limiting who can use federated networks kinda goes against the federated nature of such networks. What’s next, we’ll have a centralized blacklist of lemmy instances.