I think it's pretty safe to say that the majority of us are here to avoid another corporate takeover of our preferred platforms. It would seem to me to be a tad irresponsible to allow Facebook into our space with open arms, allowing them to hoover up our data. I would love to keep using Lemmy.world, but will happily change instances if need be, and I feel many share that sentiment.

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

[–] EnderMB@lemmy.world 35 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Given that we've watched communities like Reddit become more closed, I would rather Lemmy not do the same. The best thing an instance can do is keep them on a very tight leash, and kick out at the first sign of a rule being broken.

What Lemmy needs, above anything, is engagement. Be open to the users from Threads, instead of punishing them because you hate Meta. Many people joined Lemmy because the idea of the fediverse meant freedom to choose, and while instances are free to allow/deny who they want, it shouldn't be a detriment to users that want to experience Lemmy.

[–] laverabe@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That's not how EEE works at all. Facebook will embrace Lemmy, extend/improve Lemmy, and then extinguish/disadvantage the native Lemmy community, until the Lemmy server serves so little of a purpose it is shut down.

[+] Eldritch@lemmy.world -6 points 9 months ago (1 children)

How? The unhinged ranting that threads will federate with mastodon, not Lemmy. And the frothy incoherent rage that Lemmy needs to defederate from something that doesn't currently exist and will not impact them significantly in any way once they do exist. Makes me think none of you have actually thought this through in a rational manner.

[–] angrymouse@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Ahmm, lemmy.world is already federated with mastodon as well, fediverse is one network of federated instances, it is not one for mastodon and another for lemmy. You can interact with mastodon post already from here

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Yes. And you'd struggle to find where someone did that. It's so awkward and uncommon it's truly a non issue.

[–] ItsMeSpez@lemmy.world 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Except that Threads is not going to engage mutually so this argument is moot. If we federate with Threads but they do not federate with us, what exactly to we have to gain from this besides Meta's rage algorithms?

[–] bluefirex@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Great how everyone saw one post from Mosseri a week ago and decided to just ignore all following posts. The one-sided federation atm is TEMPORARY. They will fully federate in the upcoming months.

[–] ItsMeSpez@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

Then we shouldn't even be considering our federation until they are willing to properly join the community.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 9 points 9 months ago

Defederating Threads doesn't make us a closed community. All that's going to happen is we'll basically end up on Threads without actually being on Threads. People will either migrate there or to an instance that doesn't have Meta/Facebook everywhere.

[–] Carighan@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Same. Defederate - or rate limit - them if the load should become an issue.