Afaik, whenever an Activitypub instance has defederated from another it has always had to do with some combination of bad user behavior, poor moderation, and/or spam. Are the various instance admins who have decided to preemptively block threads.net simply convinced that these traits will be inevitable with it? Is it more of a symbolic move, because we all hate Meta? Or is the idea to just maintain a barrier (albeit a porous one) between us and the part of the Internet inhabited by our chuddy relatives?

(For my part, I'm working on setting up my own Lemmy and/or Pixelfed instance(s) and I do not currently intend to defederate.)

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

[–] AbouBenAdhem 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think it might accomplish more to wait a few days or hours for them to do something that egregiously violates community standards, then defederate en masse—and use the defederation as an event to draw media attention to their practices.

[–] Grangle1 2 points 1 year ago

Threads is already 30x bigger than Lemmy and many times bigger than even Mastodon. Mass defederation won't be making any sort of large media news outlets. We wouldn't have any sort of significant numbers at that point.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It would be nice if there was some kind of open Internet code of conduct that could be pointed to as a reason for defederating, which journalists could reference in their coverage.

[–] sauerkraus 1 points 1 year ago

The code reads: moderate your own instance however you like.