I keep seeing this argument about "but threads content!"

Who gives a shit about threads content? I didn't join Lemmy to read god damn threads content, if I want the god damn threads content ILL MAKE A FUCKING THREADS ACCOUNT. If I want to interact with those fuckheads...ILL MAKE A FUCKING THREADS ACCOUNT

This is seriously the dumbest thing brought up in favor of letting Meta in. Do you still see Facebook reposts on Reddit without a Facebook account and connecting reddit to Facebook? Yes? Then what do we care if we won't have a direct feed, because if it's worth a shit it'll be reposted everywhere.

Defederate and let those idiots who want threads TO MAKE A THREADS ACCOUNT. It's "free and so simple!"

I advise against even CONSIDERING a cooperation with META. That alone will make users think you are in it for the gains, that you can be baught. There is no value that META can bring to the Fediverse. And I hope in the future outgoing defederation will be possible too, like blocking certain instances from accessing our activity via the pub. But this request comes from Fediverse, and META will request other things from ActivityPub. They will seem to contribute while muddying the waters. They are a huge monster coming our way and we'd better start raising the walls.

This is a very level-headed and sincere explanation, and I love it. I support it 100%.

While supporting people's neutrality in moderation team, I gotta say that the best way to settle this would be giving users the choice of their own. Most people here are the ones who came from oppressed platforms that silence their users and they wanted to have a choice.

It could be solved like how lemm.ee did this, by giving poll to their users.

Federating threads would again make some of people to do the same mistake. It will be easy for them to fall in, for convenient posting and reach to Fediverse, most of them wouln't even know how this works, they would only tap the screen and accept that it just WORKS.

Instead we shouldn't give even a possibility for convenience to them, they should search for the REAL freedom platforms and know their existence.

People will come here sooner or later, but we shouldn't give them opportunity to not to.

Very thoughtful and measured response admin. Thank you for this. Given how you follow topics and people on Mastodon, I cannot come to a reason why Threads will be bad for fed.

I see it as a win, not because of meta and people using it, but because it'll introduce more people to federated services. If Threads takes off and Twitter continues to circle the drain, I can envision the National Weather Service (NWS) and weather spotters transitioning over. There is literally no chance of that happening now, but Threads might be what overcomes that inertia.

I was pretty close to filtering Threads from my feed because the topic had been beaten to death with some patently immature and paranoid discussions, I'm glad I didn't.

It's great to see you address this and display good understanding of all the facets and why they are or aren't a problem.

In particular, I appreciate that you recognize the issues with moderation and content monopolization that would most likely occur as a result of hundreds of millions of Threads users flooding the ecosystem.

This is a little corner of the internet that people have flocked to for very specific reasons, either to specifically escape corporate control or to seek an environment that is less toxic than the alternative. This is a nascent community that is taking shape, slowly. Connecting it to one of the largest, loudest and most toxic social media actors at this crucial stage of building the identity of Lemmy sounds a lot like playing with fire.

I think why many people feel so strongly about this matter is that we are dealing with a known quantity. From a corporate perspective, we know what Meta stands for and how they do business. We know they monetize outrage and seek to trap their users in parasitic feedback loops to drive engagement. We know they have no moral or legal scruples.

The same can be said about userbase. This isn't an unknown group of people with an unfamiliar culture that - who knows, maybe they're kind and nice? These are people from Facebook and Instagram, probably supplemented by plenty from Twitter too with how that platform is doing. We already know the culture on those platforms, it's been shaped by the outrage centric monetization and (lack of) moderation.

It's possible that not many of them will find their way over here, but in my brief time here I have already seen interactions with Mastodon users, both in comments and as posts on the All feed. Now imagine a platform with a thousand times more users than Mastodon. Yes, perhaps the tiger won't find its way in, but why leave the front door open and just pray it's docile?

Still, I appreciate the transparent communication once again, and it seems these are issues you are aware of, so I trust that you'll make a good decision when the time comes.

• Facebook is completely driven by ad revenue. There is nothing stopping them from sending out ads as posts/comments with artificially inflated scores, which would ensure that their ads end up on the "all" page of federated servers.
• Threads already has more users than all Lemmy instances combined. Even if their algorithms don't apply to the rest of the fediverse directly, they can still completely dictate what the "all" page will look like for all instances by simply controlling what their own users see and vote on.
• In general, Facebook has shown countless times that they don't have their users best interests in mind. They view users as something to exploit for revenue.

I'm not a Lemmy.world user, but this a top-notch response.

Take your time and don't stress yourself.

I appreciate the detailed and thoughtful response. Measured approaches are always best when you have time and resources to appropriately react down the road as you mentioned.

With that being said I have no interest in dealing with Meta, Twitter, or any similar company. Their leadership and shareholders only care about one thing - maximizing profits. If I want to interact with their products then I will go out of my way to sign up and use their services…simple as that. They’re not here on the Fediverse out of curiousity or the goodness of their hearts to stand up a lasting community.

I expect some (maybe a lot of downvotes) but I don’t trust Meta in the slightest.

Embrace, extend, and extinguish (EEE) - We don't think they can. If anyone can explain how they technically would, please let us know. Even if Meta forks Lemmy and gets rid of the original software, Lemmy will survive.

Regardless if we know the method in which they will attempt it, we know what they are and what their ultimate goal is. Just because you can't see the fangs doesn't mean you invite the menacing stranger in black into your home in the middle of the night.

Also, "Lemmy will survive" is a bit like saying "technically the earth will survive after climate change". We're not just interested in continued existence, but in the manner that existence takes. If Meta is allowed to set-up shop in the fediverse, they will come to define it, and new users will see it as the fediverse. By the time Lemmy.world defederates, it will be like cutting off its own arm and no one will want to leave Threads anyway.

Basically, let the fediverse grow without this snake in the garden. Let it form its own identity without Meta so it can serve as the counterpoint to it and refuge from it.

I'm not interested in the vast majority of Instagram content but that doesn't mean that an IG-based platform should be blocked because the vast majority of content is also inoffensive. The outlook that I could follow accounts from TV shows and comedians I like without logging into a dedicated service is exciting. Given that I'm pondering to move from another Mastodon instance to calckey.world, it's refreshing that the admin team does not cave to baseless hysteria (it's baseless because Threads doesn't federate with anything, yet, therefore any judgement of the effect on the Fediverse is not based on facts, especially when it comes from people like EU citizens for whom Threads isn't even available).

Additionally, the inability of individuals to block an instance means we have to do what is best for the community.

You could just file a feature request for Lemmy. 🤷 Chances are, given the influx of developers, that user-level instance blocking will be implemented before Threads adopts ActivityPub.

I fully expect Threads to be vaporware, just like the Metaverse. The only way I see it replacing Twitter is if they're more aggressive with forcing Instagram users onto the service, which they might do, but more likely it's just going to be a flash in the pan.

Twitter will hold on for a while longer yet.

Hi, I'm new. Been hanging out for a few days and I like what this instance, this piece of software (Lemmy) and what the fediverse does, for a multitude of reasons. I'll admit I'm new to the federation stuff, so my knowledge is limited, but I deeply wish for the fediverse to gain a massive foothold and become the norm for how to do social media stuff in the future.

Before I share a thought, I figured I should say that the transparency is super appreciated, and I support the current stance regardless. That said...

On the topic of EEE:

It's been bothering me lately that the discussion of whether or not Meta will engange in EEE-type tactics is centered around whether or not they will try to squeeze out Lemmy or Mastodon. Isn't that a bit of a pointless discussion? The problem, and the reason why Meta federating with these open communities is so scary, is that if we allow them to become the biggest provider in the space alongside all the various instances that are running either Lemmy or Mastodon, is that they'll start dictating the future of AcitivityPub itself. Whether or not Meta will try to embrace and strangle Mastodon is sort of besides the point, the fear is that they'll do to ActivityPub what Google did to XMPP and probably many other companies have done to many other fun standards and technologies.

The reason I personally think we shouldn't federate, under any circumstances, is for exactly that reason. Sure, we'll (or I guess Mastodon-users) will only see a rise on content and people to engage with which is good and allows us to take part without being the person who refuses to use socks in the room, but it sort of also devalues Lemmy and Mastodon (moreso Mastodon) by making the "default choice" Threads, doesn't it? That gives Meta insane leverage over the protocol itself, and should they wish to, they absolutely could position themselves to dictate the future of ActivityPub. Even worse, they could build ontop of ActivityPub and choke our spaces out, just like they did with XMPP.

Why is this never discussed? I didn't see any thoughts on this in Rochko's post on the matter either, and I have to admit I feel slightly uncomfortable at the thought that this particular part of the discussion is sidestepped. It doesn't matter if they fork Lemmy or Mastodon, or any other client-software built on top of ActivityPub for that matter, what worries me (and maybe others) is by devaluing our own "platforms" we automatically crown Meta the king of the protocol, because they become said default choice and hold massive leverage over content.

This is probably the exact issue a lot of Reddit-users looking for new spaces are feeling right now; the content is sort of locked to that other place with no way to actively "force" (nor should they have, just to have that said) content to happen here. If we open the doors, federate, and Meta decides to make their interpretation of AP in such a way that Lemmy or Mastodon devs really can't effectively share that content both ways, it likely will end up killing them (and AP to a degree) in the future once that link is dead or dying, and users will end up leaving to follow the content they want. That drain is gonna leave a lot of instances barren. At the same time, in the here and now, by using "we're federated with Threads!" as a selling point effectively kills our current momentum too, because why not just register with Threads then? It's the bigger platform, all the users are there and it's company-ran and so safe to stay for a while. So that initial surge and following smaller surges just won't happen, because Meta sucked the wind out of our sales.

Just thinking out loud. I still think the position held in OP is good, and at this point I agree, but I wish the talk around EEE was about AP, not the softwares we're using to have this little panic attack on. Meta, if of ill-intent, has likely not set their sights at Mastodon and Lemmy, they're looking to embrace, extend and extinguish ActivityPub.

disappointing those who desire interaction with Threads

Maybe those rare few (deranged) people should just go create a Threads account? This is a very unconvincing attempt at appearing "objective".

Lemmy will survive.> wouldn't it be better to take care of it, not just "survive" ?