• MudMan
    link
    fedilink
    -4
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    It’s honestly kind of irrational. The “embrace, extend, extinguish” stuff is on shaky grounds as a framework as it is, but it wasn’t even part of the conversation until people started trying to retroactively justify the knee-jerk rejection to Meta.

    So it’s mostly “we should grow the “fediverse” into the new universal social tool. No, not like that”.

    But hey, here we are. I’m on the record saying that I’ll mvoe instances if they join to keep them available.

    • iAmTheTot
      link
      fedilink
      1111 months ago

      Isn’t the entire point of these platforms and the nature of federation is that they get to decide who they federate with and when, and even why?

      • MudMan
        link
        fedilink
        711 months ago

        Sure. And that the users get to pick their instance based on those decisions.

        Which is what I’m saying I’ll do.

        Problem with that train of thought is you always land in weird anarchocapitalist loopholes. Ultimately there is a level of communal decisionmaking that ends up happening and needs some degree of organization, even if the alternatives are also supported on the fringes.

        • iAmTheTot
          link
          fedilink
          111 months ago

          I’m not telling you not to pick your instance, but I was countering your claim that what they are doing is irrational. Because if it’s irrational, then the very point of these services is irrational.

          • MudMan
            link
            fedilink
            111 months ago

            I mean, social media sucks. It was a mistake. All of it. This included. So yeah?

            But no, a specific choice to defederate can make more or less sense. Not every option is equal. Defederating because some place is too popular and you kinda don’t like that it has a bunch of normies in it and is made by a big social media corpo? Kind of irrational. Defederating because disruptive trolls are harassing your users? Yeah, alright.

            FWIW, I’m not even saying that an influx of Meta users wouldn’t be disruptive. I have a strong suspicion that it would show big gaps on moderation and usability around here if you suddenly added a couple of zeros to the userbase. I still don’t think making it a rule that federated services have to be small is the right solution to that.

          • capital
            link
            English
            011 months ago

            Democracy is about choice too.

            I’d call Trump voters irrational.

            By your logic, I couldn’t.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      511 months ago

      EEE was the first issue folks brought up when threads was announced. It’s always been apart of the conversation.

      • MudMan
        link
        fedilink
        111 months ago

        The conversation doesn’t start there, though. Before Threads was announced everybody was buzzing about how everyone should come over here and they really hoped new services would join ActivityPub and it should become just like email.

        Then Threads and BlueSky started suggesting doing just that and it was all “actually, Google kinda EEE’d the crap out of email and RSS and we don’t want those guys here at all”.

        So no, EEE wasn’t always part of the converrsation. It was only part of the conversation when the hipstery claim that the cool obscure thing should be for everybody got replaced by the hipstery claim that the cool obscure thing was selling out and should be gatekept to keep it real.

          • MudMan
            link
            fedilink
            111 months ago

            Fair enough. As long as the different perspectives are represented and the groupthink doesn’t take over I don’t need everybody to agree with me.

    • sour
      link
      fedilink
      411 months ago

      what wrong with facebook rejection

      • MudMan
        link
        fedilink
        111 months ago

        With thinking Facebook sucks? Nothing.

        With thinking Facebook sucks and Facebook’s audience should stay in Facebook while the “fediverse” stays small and exclusive? That it goes against the stated goals of providing decentralized, open social platforms as a replacement for current closed platforms.

            • sour
              link
              fedilink
              2
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              does mastodon

              decentralized

              only one instance

              pick one

                • sour
                  link
                  fedilink
                  2
                  edit-2
                  11 months ago

                  mastodon.social already gets criticism

                  • Draconic NEO
                    link
                    English
                    211 months ago

                    Yeah I know plenty of instances limit them making follows approval only. I also saw this line on a person’s profile: “if you follow me from mastodon.social I won’t approve your requests, migrate to a different instance”.

                    I think the main reason is because mastodon.social has a lot of spam (or has had it in the past) though I’m sure that the threads issue and the fact that they want to federate and encourage federation with threads probably isn’t going to help.