Email or username:

Password:

Forgot your password?
All posts Aral's posts Post Back to profile
Aral Balkan

Dear @Gargron,

A fediverse server called Threads is violating mastodon.social’s second server rule:

“2. No racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia…
Transphobic behavior such as intentional misgendering and deadnaming is strictly prohibited.”

glaad.org/smsi/report-meta-fai

Can you please defederate from this server to protect the trans people on mastodon.social?

Thank you.

PS. It’s run by these guys: techcrunch.com/2024/03/26/face

#mastodonSocial #fediblock #threads #meta #mastodon #transphobia

27 March at 16:58 | Open on mastodon.ar.al
91 comments
Mysteriarch :masto:

@aral It has been clear from the beginning that federating with Meta would result in them becoming 'too big to defederate', regardless of moderation rules. It's one (of the many) reasons why preemptive defederation with Threads was always the better choice.

27 March at 17:04 | Reply | Open on climatejustice.social
djw

@aral @Gargron Piling on here, I could not agree more. The Fediverse is a welcoming space that takes people as they are, with essentially the singular exception of hateful people.

I'm sure I've spoken poorly more than once, and I'll never truly be the person that I aspire to be. But I come from a place of acceptance, love, and equality and it seems reasonable to me to expect the same in return.

27 March at 17:04 | Reply | Open on m.djw.li
Only a :verify_anime: fl👀f.
Snow :debian: :matrix: :xmpp:

@aral
🤦‍♂️
Great, I hadn't read it. Well done, ALL instances of the fediverse should do it.

27 March at 17:22 | Reply | Open on snowfan.masto.host
DELETED

@aral @Gargron "akschually, Threads should be federated because muh freedom of speech" comments in 3... 2... 1...

27 March at 17:24 | Reply | Open on bark.lgbt
Dan Morris

@aral @Gargron This is a tough one, because a mastodon server has 2 choices: block users and block servers. Generally, you'd block a server if its own managers are unable to moderate their own users (thereby making it in the interest of the server managers to maintain some moderation). However, I think we can all agree that Threads is going to be a hot-mess that is never going to be seriously moderated.

So, the question is, "how" can this be done without completely cutting them off? Or, perhaps it's best NOT to accommodate them and just shut them off?

I have lots of family on Facebook, but my account has been inactive for 5yrs now. I'd like to avoid ever going there and just have them on here -somehow. But, I'd rather not hear from them and avoid hearing a bunch of nazi ranting and disinformation every day.

If there's a way to do it, it would be cool. If not.... meh. block them.

@aral @Gargron This is a tough one, because a mastodon server has 2 choices: block users and block servers. Generally, you'd block a server if its own managers are unable to moderate their own users (thereby making it in the interest of the server managers to maintain some moderation). However, I think we can all agree that Threads is going to be a hot-mess that is never going to be seriously moderated.

So, the question is, "how" can this be done without completely cutting them off? Or, perhaps...

27 March at 17:36 | Reply | Open on sfba.social
scott f

@coldfish @aral @Gargron Here's a great essay on the dilemma of what to do about Threads: erinkissane.com/untangling-thr

I thought this point was key: "the line, for some of us, isn’t about 'non-commercial' or 'non-algorithmic,' but about Meta’s specific record of bloody horrors." Meta/Facebook is in some ways much worse than I realized

27 March at 17:44 | Reply | Open on carfree.city
misfit loser zealot patatas

@scott

I'd add, also, that the profit motive is arguably the single biggest reason why these those bloody horrors occurred.

No different from what Boeing has recently been exposed for doing: trading human lives in exchange for number goes up!

@coldfish @aral @Gargron

27 March at 19:14 | Reply | Open on mstdn.patatas.ca
Jargoggles

@coldfish @aral @Gargron
The fact that Threads is set up as a monolithic instance that prevents anyone from blocking it in piecemeal is a Threads problem, not a fedi server admin problem (the same is true of Bluesky).

Like you said, Threads can't be trusted to properly moderate its content and the tool that server admins have for that is defederation. Making individual users have to handle a deluge of toxic content themselves has *never* been seriously considered as an appropriate response by any instance that cares about its users.

The fact that Threads is so massive isn't a reason for federating with them, it's the reason why it's even more absurd to act like this is a problem that individual users need to deal with.

If we defederate from toxic instances that have hundreds, maybe thousands of users, why in the good god damn is it not an obvious decision when we're talking about an instance with *millions* of users?

@coldfish @aral @Gargron
The fact that Threads is set up as a monolithic instance that prevents anyone from blocking it in piecemeal is a Threads problem, not a fedi server admin problem (the same is true of Bluesky).

Like you said, Threads can't be trusted to properly moderate its content and the tool that server admins have for that is defederation. Making individual users have to handle a deluge of toxic content themselves has *never* been seriously considered as an appropriate response by any...

27 March at 18:13 | Reply | Open on kolektiva.social
Emme Ci 🍉

@jargoggles @coldfish @aral @Gargron
The fraction of toxic users on Threads is still small.

I believe there are ways to make Threads opt in at the user level, so that your users only have to deal with it if they want to.

That should be the preferred option, unless there is a clear consensus in your instance to fully defederate.

28 March at 7:29 | Reply | Open on freeradical.zone
zigguratmonk

@coldfish @aral @Gargron Blocking a server because of a lack of moderation makes sense. Threads is free to federate, but just because they are big doesn't give them a pass on community norms and standards. They can improve their moderation if they decide it is worth it.

27 March at 18:58 | Reply | Open on mastodon.social
P Stewart

@coldfish @aral @Gargron It's pretty simple: it *can't* be done without completely cutting them off, due to their size and Meta's active protection of most forms of hate speech. The solution's to treat them the same way most of fedi's already treated sites like Gab or KF.

27 March at 19:01 | Reply | Open on mastodon.sandwich.net
Sally Strange

@pstewart @coldfish @aral @Gargron Yep. It's actually rather simple. It's just that the correct course of action is inconvenient for ~some~ people.

27 March at 19:05 | Reply | Open on eldritch.cafe
Alexander 😷

@coldfish @aral @Gargron

> Generally, you'd block a server if its own managers are unable to moderate their own users

It's more like "unwilling" than "unable" in Facebook's case, but you could have stopped writing right there...

27 March at 21:28 | Reply | Open on tech.lgbt
Ambulocetus
David Megginson

@ambulocetus That is not a helpful answer. In the fediverse, we're supposed protect each-other; we don't demand that vulnerable people protect themselves, and rejecting hate and abuse is one of our founding principles.

27 March at 18:06 | Reply | Open on mstdn.ca
Ambulocetus

@david_megginson I'm not talking about defense at all. We ALL need to go on the offense! I'm not telling them they are on their own; I am explaining what I do, and how they can get others to do things that can help us WIN! You don't win a boxing match by only blocking, you have to throw punches, and with all the money and power on the other side, we ALL need to throw as many punches as hard and as fast as we can. What are YOU doing to help other than criticizing me?

27 March at 18:34 | Reply | Open on qoto.org
David Megginson

@ambulocetus asked

>

What are YOU doing to help

I'm advocating for protecting everyone, rather than telling each person to protect themselves. Please trust me — the extra load of individual blocking is the last and worst resort when you belong to a vulnerable community, and are already worn down by constant barriers and micro-aggressions.

I believe you that your post was well-intentioned, but please try to understand that people won't perceive it the way you hope they will.

27 March at 18:39 | Reply | Open on mstdn.ca
Ambulocetus

@david_megginson So the answer to my question is that you are just criticising others who are trying to teach people how to fight. OK, important work. Carry on.

27 March at 18:49 | Reply | Open on qoto.org
Ambulocetus

@david_megginson What am I doing to help? Well, I was thinking about that all through my martial arts class. I have marched uin the streets, I have study strategy, I have punched actual Nazis in the actual face. So forgive me if I get slightly miffed when someone sits behind a keyboard and tells me I'm not helping. I walk the walk, you just talk.

28 March at 1:44 | Reply | Open on qoto.org
DELETED

@aral @Gargron I left mainstream social media over six years ago. I haven't missed it. I came to Mastodon last year in the hope that I could use the Fediverse to primarily champion mental health and interact with folks that have a decent moral compass. Even though I blocked the Threads domain, simply allowing Meta to federate has me questioning whether or not I can stay. I suspect many Mastodon users like myself came here to avoid Big Tech in the first place.

27 March at 17:53 | Reply | Open on mastodon.social
DELETED

@richardpascoe @aral @Gargron there's a brazillion instances that either block threads, or have agreed to block threads and anything federating with it. You can always migrate your account there

But that doesn't justify Threads being welcome by major instances, I'm surprised that a company with such gruesome Privacy Policy and TOS has any right to have a place on fedi

27 March at 18:14 | Reply | Open on bark.lgbt
DELETED

@witix @aral @Gargron Of course, plus it was quite simple to block the domain myself. However, you hit the nail on the head that it is Meta being allowed to federate in the first place that is the core issue for users such as myself.

27 March at 18:26 | Reply | Open on mastodon.social
DELETED

@richardpascoe @aral @Gargron True
Anyway, if being federated with meta pisses you off here's a curated list of instances that ditch it or ditch it with a middle finger to it ^^
(In case this post gets some attention I should probably mention it's not mine)
fedipact.veganism.social/?v2

27 March at 18:28 | Reply | Open on bark.lgbt
3dcandy

@richardpascoe @aral @Gargron This is what I am hearing a lot - regardless of the rights or wrongs a lot of people want away from Meta all together. I guess in this case we need to educate those people to block threads.net at a per user level, rather than a per instance level.

27 March at 19:00 | Reply | Open on mastodon.social
Alexander 😷
DELETED

@alxndr @3dcandy @aral @Gargron Indeed, and I've already blocked the domain. I also know it may be too late to bolt the gate now that Threads is here. My point is, it shouldn't have been allowed in the first place. Obviously, that's my own personal opinion based purely on what promise the Fediverse held for me.

28 March at 6:19 | Reply | Open on mastodon.social
Daniel S. Reichenbach

@aral @Gargron seems pretty easy, Meta will enforce their rules without considering future hope for improvements, so Mastodon should too. IMHO any debate about why to not do it is digging to deep into Metas virtual butthole.

27 March at 17:55 | Reply | Open on mastodon.world
fromjason.xyz 🖤

@aral @Gargron of all the pro-meta blog posts in the past six months, I have never read anything to the tune of "Threads is bound by Mastodon's terms of service like any other instance."

Hundreds of thousands of published words and none formed a sentence close to that. Not even in the form of a question. Odd.

27 March at 18:04 | Reply | Open on mastodon.social
Jamesh Isn't Here

@fromjason @aral @Gargron Because there's no such centralized terms of service that binds all instances. Or did you mean Mastodon.social specifically?

27 March at 19:08 | Reply | Open on ohai.social
fromjason.xyz 🖤

@jameshisnthere @aral @Gargron federation comes with terms for most of the popular servers.

27 March at 19:30 | Reply | Open on mastodon.social
Jamesh Isn't Here

@fromjason @aral @Gargron Sure. every individual server has its own defederation standard. Most of the big servers seem to use a light hand compared to some when defederating entire servers and maybe do most of their moderation at the user level. At least, that's my impression.

There is a minimum standard to be included on the joinmastodon.org website, but threads won't be there regardless.

27 March at 19:59 | Reply | Open on ohai.social
fromjason.xyz 🖤

@jameshisnthere @aral honestly dude, I'm not into having a pedantic convo about mastodon terms. It derails and degrades the point that Meta has carte blanche with its interpolation by those with the most influential voices in the Fediverse.

If you're willing to advocate for a company like meta to gain access, why not be clear with what is and isn't acceptable from the jump? Seems like a reasonable thing to do.

27 March at 20:22 | Reply | Open on mastodon.social
Jamesh Isn't Here

@fromjason I'm sorry for coming across that way or if I misunderstood. I read your comment as asking for a blanket statement from some authority speaking for the entire fediverse, which is obviously impossible. In retrospect I realize you may have been asking for certain people to make it clearer that they won't give threads special treatment or maybe I just don't get what you're saying. But, yeah, I'll shut up now.

27 March at 22:14 | Reply | Open on ohai.social
Oliphant

@fromjason @aral @Gargron They will literally use that as a reason to block content from other servers.

Yes, you're bound by the rules of the server you're on, and that includes what content is allowable, shareable, etc, even if that content originates from Threads.

27 March at 20:12 | Reply | Open on oliphant.social
Promethea :flag_trans_anim:

@fromjason @aral @Gargron

That would be because threads doesn't use Mastodon, and Mastodon doesn't have terms of service anyway.

It's more a matter of ethical consistency. Someone who runs an instance that federates with threads can't claim to give a darn about any of its users in vulnerable groups.

28 March at 7:34 | Reply | Open on toot.foundation
WobblyElmer

@aral @Gargron

I'm not big on censorship, but I know dog-whistle reactionary kaka when I hear it.
Pull the pin on #threads.

27 March at 18:37 | Reply | Open on kolektiva.social
DELETED

@aral @Gargron Yep threads.net needs to be blocked just like any other bad actor in the fediverse that houses hate speech. Lets not create double standards just because it's Meta giving Mastodon/ATP mass appeal. Time to put your money where your mouth is, so to speak.

27 March at 18:40 | Reply | Open on kzoo.to
Michael Bishop ☕

@aral @Gargron

I have already blocked Threads and have no interest in any connection with them.

27 March at 19:00 | Reply | Open on mastodon.world
Twitter_expat ✅(Fedi Resident)

@aral @Gargron

Didn’t the majority of the users here ran away from one person making all the decisions?

27 March at 19:02 | Reply | Open on mastodon.world
Fahri Reza

@Twitter_expat @aral @Gargron social media refugees whose home were taken over

27 March at 19:46 | Reply | Open on mastodon.social
Alex

@aral @Gargron its a tough one..
For me personally the primary reason to defederate threads is history - for decades large corpos have followed agressive assimilation principle. There are barely any exceptions and I cant come up with any, its highly likely threads will be such a case again.

On the other hand, federating with threads gives access to millions of new users that can be positively influenced, threads brings with it potential to take fedi out of fringe and into mainstream.

27 March at 19:11 | Reply | Open on mastodon.social
Daniel

@aral@mastodon.ar.al Where does it say that they defederate all those instances tho? That's just one tool of moderation.

27 March at 19:16 | Reply | Open on federation.network
Moved

@aral @Gargron

I wonder the same about Vivaldi's instance.

@Vivaldi @jon

27 March at 20:06 | Reply | Open on social.vivaldi.net
Chris Who

@aral @Gargron It's symbolic because I've not yet opened the instance to users yet, but I've blocked threads.net and don't know any reason for not blocking threads other than interests that, for one reason or another, align with threads or meta. #Fediblock #Threads #BlockThreads

27 March at 20:06 | Reply | Open on social.signalthirteen.zone
hansup 🍉

@aral @Gargron Still haven’t seen one argument that makes sense to have bloody meta in the fediverse.
People on meta will NEVER care 1 second about the fediverse. If you want to connect with your family on meta, join meta. The whole point of the fediverse was being an alternative, not a replacement.

27 March at 20:37 | Reply | Open on mastodon.hansup.be
Uraael

@hans@mastodon.hansup.be @aral@mastodon.ar.al @Gargron@mastodon.social Me neither. It always comes down to those who genuinely care versus the tech-bro protocol-aholics

28 March at 7:15 | Reply | Open on blahaj.zone
Tripop

@hans @aral @Gargron ... So the all point of fediverse is to.. LOOSE against big tech company ?

So... You don't care about normal people then ? Their mental health on the internet, the isolation on social media ?

It's JUST a alternative ? You don't want to fight, so ?

GAFAM already won and you just want a little space only for you ? So brave.

28 March at 9:56 | Reply | Open on catodon.social
Peter H. Fröhlich

@aral @Gargron@mastodon.social I just block his stupid instance as well. I don't care that it's the biggest one. Whoever can't be bothered to move from mastodon.social is not someone I need to hear from. 🤷

27 March at 21:07 | Reply | Open on floss.social
Alexander 😷

@aral No, listen, it's very important for @Gargron's wife to be able to chat with her Facebook friends, without having to install a second app on her phone.

(I wish I was kidding...)

27 March at 21:12 | Reply | Open on tech.lgbt
Mister Moo 🐮

@aral @Gargron Just to give the other side of this: there are probably a lot of pro-trans people who see server-level defederation of an instance as big as Threads as a draconian over-reaction in light of available user-level blocking tools. I just don't see any room in this thread for reasonable disagreement. It doesn't help that the few people I *am* seeing disagree are wearing their awfulness on their sleeves. Social media incentivizes a black-or-white viewpoint and I see tons of that here.

27 March at 21:18 | Reply | Open on mastodon.online
Aral Balkan

@MisterMoo @Gargron And are all these pro-trans people who want to federate with Threads in the room with you now?

28 March at 7:10 | Reply | Open on mastodon.ar.al
Uraael

@MisterMoo@mastodon.online @aral@mastodon.ar.al @Gargron@mastodon.social Too big to be banned?

No, no it really isn't.

The problem with leaving responsibility to user-level blocking tools is the size of the server in question; blocking individual threats contained among 120'000'000 users would be a full-time job. Also: you're saying you're willing to expose users to that harm. There's no real argument for this that doesn't ignore/think acceptable that prospect.

28 March at 7:10 | Reply | Open on blahaj.zone
monorail times

@aral @Gargron then don’t follow people on threads? I’m confused.

27 March at 23:53 | Reply | Open on worldkey.io
Matthew

@monorailtimes@worldkey.io You do know that transphobes would dogpilled trans people even online, right?
@aral@mastodon.ar.al @Gargron@mastodon.social

28 March at 7:14 | Reply | Open on blahaj.zone
Aral Balkan

@monorailtimes @Gargron You’re not confused, you’re privileged.

28 March at 7:17 | Reply | Open on mastodon.ar.al
william.maggos

@aral @Gargron

If we grow, there will always be a ton of people able to make a decent argument that something is racist, sexist, homophobic or transphobic. it will be endless battles between mods over what justifies action or else face defederation. and also tons of individuals having no idea they are silenced by entire servers. I get strict rules internally but servers blocking/silencing servers or individuals must require a higher bar and be done more transparently. #fediblockmeta

28 March at 0:11 | Reply | Open on liberal.city
Aral Balkan

@wjmaggos @Gargron If the two links I provided in the original post do not meet your bar for defederation then there’s something wrong with your bar. It also tells me your instance is not a safe space for vulnerable groups. And if your instance happens to be the flagship one and you’re fine with this, it tells me you’re legitimising this behaviour on the greater network.

#fediblockmeta #fediblock #meta

28 March at 7:06 | Reply | Open on mastodon.ar.al
mray

@wjmaggos

This *IS* the endless battle between mods you refer to. So let's get out hands dirty, no?

It certainly sucks to have to let go such a big number of people in a network. But if those admins fuck up too hard (as they do) – you can't just give it a pass, especially if it is a big instance.

28 March at 8:00 | Reply | Open on social.tchncs.de
william.maggos

@mray @aral

if the users on #threads become routinely abusive of fedi folks (by poisoning hashtags and tagging people here with crap), we will need to consider defederation. and their size will make that much more annoying to do.

that there is horrible shit there and they are abusive to their users is not a reason to block them imo. it's a reason to federate and welcome people to move here while retaining their connections there and avoiding the bad meta data policies as much as possible.

28 March at 8:28 | Reply | Open on liberal.city
mray

@wjmaggos Your bar is abuse becoming routine. That may be the point of our divergence. I consider consequences earlier.

28 March at 8:43 | Reply | Open on social.tchncs.de
william.maggos

@mray

I mean routinely as in if we regularly see direct abuse from threads users. individuals you can block/silence as a server but a flood of users there doing that shit would call for blocking/silencing that server at some point.

imo we have lots of goals. I understand safety is the top one for many. I wish we weren't thought so poorly of for not agreeing . for trying to better balance it with other concerns. I don't think we will find compromises that work for everyone but should try.

28 March at 9:06 | Reply | Open on liberal.city
mray

@wjmaggos I think it is a sane approach to tie de-federation to how effective admins can control the activity of their instance and enforce good rules. It isn't the relative density of how big the proportion of bad actors is. By your approach we would be waiting for an IMMENSE TON OF SHIT hitting the fan before "considering" defederation.

You also don't sanction states by the amount of bad deeds of its citizens. You go about how what is deemed ok officially.

28 March at 9:38 | Reply | Open on social.tchncs.de
william.maggos

@mray

I think you are misunderstanding me.

Defederation should be based on protecting the fedi as a network. On the fedi and www, there will be crap. And stuff many hate but you don't. On your fedi server or blog, post anything legal imo. But when you intentionally intrude on others' experience, there becomes cause for action imo because it can make the entire network a shitty place to be. That should be the focus of server vs server policing.

We don't have a UN to determine what's "ok".

28 March at 9:58 | Reply | Open on liberal.city
mray

@wjmaggos I don't understand, indeed. You say crap existing in the internet is a thing we have to deal with, but when there is a proposal how to deal with it you say "just deal with it"? I don't follow.

28 March at 10:04 | Reply | Open on social.tchncs.de
william.maggos

@mray

does saying "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" constitute antisemitism? Or "Israel is an apartheid state"? or "American politicians continue to support Israel because they are getting paid off"?

I don't think any of that does but I completely understand others saying those statements either are directly or they endanger Jewish people. for people who think this, what I wrote above is crap. you can keep it off your server but defederating a server for it goes too far imo.

28 March at 10:24 | Reply | Open on liberal.city
william.maggos

@mray

now if somebody was clearly pro Israel and Jewish and somebody else posted what I wrote in replies to them once or twice during a conversation on the issues, that's probably not harassment. doing it relentlessly, esp if the replied to says they consider in antisemitic, clearly is. or doing it at random times. I'd argue the person should silence/block them or maybe eventually their server should. but only block their server if this is happening a lot from multiple accounts there.

28 March at 10:38 | Reply | Open on liberal.city
mray

@wjmaggos Did you even bother to click on one of the OP links? The problems with Meta, Facebook and Zuckerbergs stuff in general can't be summarized by what brought up even by a far stretch.

28 March at 10:38 | Reply | Open on social.tchncs.de
william.maggos

@mray

I did and of course you don't see it that way. I always bring up Israel and antisemitism to lefties cause it seems to be the only issue most of us see as justifying possibly upsetting people in order to discuss freely.

were you around when people got pissed off about some liking the Harry Potter videogame or the BBC starting an instance even though they have transphobes on their shows? what's in the OP should be defederated from but you'd defend federating with harrypotter.social?

28 March at 10:51 | Reply | Open on liberal.city
william.maggos

@mray @aral

I have a Facebook account to stay connected to friends and family. I barely use it but I don't see the horrible shit. same with the crap on the wider www that I never see. this is true for most people and I see federation as more of a way out than helping the shit spread.

here we've had fights over a Harry Potter game and whether the BBC should be welcomed cause they have anti trans people on their shows. many consider criticism of Israel to be antisemitic. our norms need work.

28 March at 8:45 | Reply | Open on liberal.city
Tucker Carlson's Nuts
mathew
David

@aral @Gargron

@rober see why I was against allow Meta to federate? 😔

As always they go first after trans people, then after the rest.

"If you dont act now because you weren't a trans person. Don't cry when you're attacked."

28 March at 6:58 | Reply | Open on masto.es
Paul Sutton

@aral
@Gargron

Agreed, not defederating sends the wrong message. If admins are worried about the legal aspects of this, the UK online harms bill should give you legal protection, as that says services need to protect users.

28 March at 7:44 | Reply | Open on qoto.org
Paul Sutton

@aral @Gargron

This is also interesting "2nd Link"

Facebook snooped on users’ Snapchat traffic in secret project, documents reveal

One of the concerns about federating with Meta is privacy of users here, I think this article justifies that concern 200+
percent.

They CANNOT be trusted

28 March at 8:05 | Reply | Open on qoto.org
eatyourglory

@aral Genuine question, how is defederating threads protecting trans people?

28 March at 8:46 | Reply | Open on mastodon.uno
Tripop

@eatyourglory @aral because trans people are babies, they cannot know how to defend themself, and like... use mastodon to block servers and users, so big admin guy have to think for them.

I guess.

28 March at 10:19 | Reply | Open on catodon.social
Aral Balkan

@eatyourglory In the same way that defederating Gab is.

28 March at 11:06 | Reply | Open on mastodon.ar.al
🇪🇸🇺🇦 Ignacio 🇺🇦🇪🇸

@aral @Gargron Interesting that nobody puts on the table the third server rule:

"3. No incitement of violence or promotion of violent ideologies...
Support for violent groups or events is prohibited."

While some usual suspects, like masto.nobigtech.es blatantly support Ukrainian genocide by Ruzzia and call nazis to Ukrainian people, and nobody asks for defederation. I wonder why :thonking:

28 March at 10:11 | Reply | Open on mstdn.social
Aral Balkan

@icg937 Gee, I guess it must be a conspiracy.

28 March at 11:05 | Reply | Open on mastodon.ar.al
Martina Neumayer

@aral @Gargron Not only that! Allowing instances driven by Meta to federate with entire Fediverse put us all content creators and authors in very big danger of being robbed from our work efforts and our money as well.
As we saw on many examples in the past, Zuckerberg's company doesn't respect any laws, rules, rights and so on, secretly stealing and then selling lots of data/content from the unaware people behind their backs.
This is absolutely unacceptable and also illegal, criminal behavior!

28 March at 11:17 | Reply | Open on mastodon.social
McWabbit

@aral @Gargron
This is why there is federation. If this server is still federated to Threads in, let's say 6 months, I'll browse below list and pick another server.
On the other hand, I hope all the larger servers reconsider and block #Threads outright.
Because if they don't, it will play right in the hands of #Meta and all the #TechBros' social media platforms to destroy smaller independent alternatives. Just like e.g. #Amazon and #Uber are doing it in their markets.

fedipact.veganism.social/?v2

@aral @Gargron
This is why there is federation. If this server is still federated to Threads in, let's say 6 months, I'll browse below list and pick another server.
On the other hand, I hope all the larger servers reconsider and block #Threads outright.
Because if they don't, it will play right in the hands of #Meta and all the #TechBros' social media platforms to destroy smaller independent alternatives. Just like e.g. #Amazon and #Uber are doing it in their markets.

28 March at 11:35 | Reply | Open on mastodon.social
Go Up