• iAmTheTot@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year 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@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year 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@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year 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@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year 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.