Time for some game theory (but actually)
Disclaimer: I know very little about anything I’m about to talk about, including the dynamics of “brigading”, the nitty gritty of ActivityPub federation, and game theory. I’m just going to go step by step, slowly, and ask people to correct me along the way.
I'd like to re-up my suggestion that more people engage in this kind of thinking. It seems like we're a few months from fedi profiles being visible on Threads. We still have time to game out scenarios and develop contingency plans. Getting more specific and granular about the threats might also help convince more big instance admins and developers to give these concerns greater weight, and exercise what leverage they have.
I think a lot depends on how FB views the community. From what I've observed from Threads and its "LET'S BE POSITIVE NO MATTER WHAT SMILE OR ELSE" tone, the goal with federation is to pass the buck on the stuff that otherwise gets them in trouble with various state authorities. "Oh, somebody saw a boob? Not our server, not our problem!"
This is still a problem, just a different kind of problem.
For example Threads could very easily dump the fash onto their own server of dipshits, so they're still on Threads, but not their problem.
@Dseitz @misc yes, I speculate they are doing this to blunt anti-trust concerns (because I do not buy whatever their line is about empowering creators). they want to say the marketplace is hypercompetitive while still owning 80% of it.
in terms of strategy, if m[.]soc defederates threads - does that help or hinder (my asserted) meta’s goal? probably helps? “well, we tried, but they took their ball and went home; we’re still open.”
@jfreebo @Dseitz It's not a strong hunch but I think if mastodon.social preemptively blocked, it would influence even more to follow, and you'd have such a small group of instances going forward with it, that Meta would likely scrap the whole plan. It would just be embarrassing at that point. And then they'd be back looking for a Plan B to placate regulators, having wasted a bunch of resources and public credibility on Plan A.
@misc @Dseitz that makes sense - if the greater ‘mastosphere’ blocks, then what’s the point? which makes me wonder if gab (or whatever hellsite is still around) will go to AP - will threads federate with them?
anyway - good on ya for trying to strategize. there's too much reflexive action without thinking things through here.
Probably it makes the most sense to monitor new instances and servers coming online after Threads federates, especially ones heavy on the stuff that's a no-no on Threads.
Masto on its own is defense against regulators; if people don't like Threads they can just jump to another instance. FB is likely counting on open source infighting keeping Masto from being a truly viable competitor and to be honest, that's not a bad bet.