Part 7 of Strategies for the free fediverses.  As the first post in the series discusses, the "free fediverses" are regions of the fediverse that reject Meta and surveillance capitalism, and these strategies position the free fediverses as an alternative to Threads and "Meta's fediverses". Join the discussion in the

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/7477620

Transitive defederation – defederating from instances that federate with Threads as well as defederating from Threads – isn’t likely to be an all-or-nothing thing in the free fediverses. Tradeoffs are different for different people and instances. This is one of the strengths of the fediverse, so however much transitive defederation there winds up being, I see it as overall as a positive thing – although also messy and complicated.

The recommendation here is for instances to consider #TransitiveDefederation: discuss, and decide what to do. I’ve also got some thoughts on how to have the discussion – and the strategic aspects.

(Part 7 of Strategies for the free fediverses )

  • balancedchaos@lemmy.worldEnglish
    115·
    10 months ago

    As long as Meta can’t infect the rest of the fediverse, or track or monetize it…fine. I just never, ever want Meta shit on my timeline.

    • intensely_human@lemm.eeEnglish
      161·
      10 months ago

      How would Meta “infect” anything? Do you really think Meta is producing self-replicating things that jump from person to person?

    • Chozo@kbin.social
      51·
      10 months ago

      What sort of “Meta shit” would you possibly expect to appear on your timeline?

      • balancedchaos@lemmy.worldEnglish
        25·
        10 months ago

        Sort by “all,” and the popular instances show up.

        I wouldn’t like to see FB and Threads dominate that with the bleating of the sheep they’ve cultivated.

        • Chozo@kbin.social
          61·
          10 months ago

          Okay, but what sort of material would you expect to actually see on your timeline in this scenario?

          • intensely_human@lemm.eeEnglish
            41·
            10 months ago

            They can’t answer this. All they do is downvote you. It means you found the end of their philosophy.

            For some people, their philosophy ends where a question about specifics begins.

            • balancedchaos@lemmy.worldEnglish
              01·
              10 months ago

              Wow. Really reaching there, huh?

              What Meta shit wouldn’t I like to see? A general watering down of the comment quality. Trolling. Nonsense. What has happened to every somewhat technical technology the second the normies cry “gatekeeping” and force their way in with a dumb fucking look on their face and without an original idea in their heads.

              That Meta shit is what I’d like to avoid. Just because one doesn’t have opportunity to respond doesn’t mean there isn’t a response.

    • FaceDeer@kbin.social
      11·
      10 months ago

      So don’t subscribe to Meta-hosted communities?

      Lots of Fediverse instances let you block whole instances, too, so you could personally block them. Problem solved.

      • thecrotch@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        1·
        10 months ago

        I’ve learned that there’s a huge number of people on lemmy who prefer government regulation to self control. I had an argument with a guy the other day who wants $12 lattes banned instead of simply not buying them. Apparently making something available is the same as putting a gun to your head and forcing you to buy it.

          • thecrotch@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            1·
            10 months ago

            No, that is an example of an appropriate problem to solve with regulation. “If something I exists I must buy it and that is the vendor’s fault” is not.