this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2023
246 points (93.0% liked)

Fediverse

28291 readers
1518 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Xylinna@lemmy.world
MrCenny@lemmy.world
TragicNotCute@lemmy.world
automodbeta@lemmy.world
woelkchen@lemmy.world
246
We have 2-3 months to compile a Threads block list (www.timothychambers.net)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by jocanib@lemmy.world to c/fediverse@lemmy.world
135 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It is expected to be 2-3 months before Threads is ready to federate (see link). There will, inevitably, be five different reactions from instances:

  1. Federate regardless (mostly the toxic instances everyone else blocks)

  2. Federate with extreme caution and good preparation (some instances with the resources and remit from their users)

  3. Defederate (wait and see)

  4. Defederate with the intention of staying defederated

  5. Defederate with all Threads-federated instances too

It's all good. Instances should do what works best for them and people should make their home with the instances that have the moderation policies they want.

In the interests of instances which choose options 2 or 3, perhaps we could start to build a pre-emptive block list for known bad actors on Threads?

I'm not on it but I think a fair few people are? And there are various commentaries which name some of the obvious offenders.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kerrigor@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Ever heard of XMPP?

If a single party participating in an open standard is large enough, they can go off the track, and then kill off interoperability.

[–] kobra@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The XMPP history going around Lemmy lately is kind of exaggerated.

[–] CthuluVoIP@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

It's blatantly wrong. Google extended XMPP for their own purposes and when participating with XMPP no longer suited them, they left. The collapse of the "XMPP userbase" is a misnomer - those users were never XMPP users. They were Google Chat users. When Google left, XMPP was in the same state it was in before Google got on board. It returned to its status as a niche protocol for a service that, as @effingjoe@kbin.social points out, people didn't really want anymore.

[–] ninekeysdown@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I completely agree with this take!

[–] Pandantic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

So is this suggesting we need more instances?

[–] effingjoe@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I feel like people read a comment that linked XMPP with EEE and keep parroting it while not understanding it.

XMPP still exists, but people largely don't want "Instant Messaging" anymore. They don't want to care about whether the person is online before they can send a message.

Google dropping support for XMPP didn't do that, it's what caused them to drop it. They moved on to what people wanted: asynchronous messaging.

This concern about the now overused "EEE" stuff is blown away out of proportion.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

But this isn't a single party. Mastodon and Lemmy and Kbin are well established

[–] Kerrigor@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

They're well-established now. A behemoth like Meta entering upends everything. Especially if they gain traction over the next year.