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.

  • TORFdot0@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    11 months ago

    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