Dear , here's a poll for you! Completely hypothetically, if and implemented , would you be inclined to allow them to federate with your instance?

Yes, I appreciate that "it depends" and "it's complicated" (it really really is!). But please 🐻 with me, I'm just curious about your gut feeling about this. :blobcatcoffee:

@rysiek My gut feeling is Birdsite. Since it is nowhere as bad as Facebook. But I would federate with either if they themselves became decentralized (and deal with each node on a case by case basis).

@rysiek Personally I only have people on Twitter anyway, there's nothing to gain with Facebook federating. If anything I can see more generalist, demographic-oriented instances enabling Facebook, but that sure won't be me
@rysiek the one you should have actually considered is Instagram, that has MASSIVE network effect among the more active, fedi-like demography

@rysiek I don't think so, and that's because giant instances are effectively impossible to moderate. If Twitter broke up into many instances, per country/region or per topic, then I'd be more inclined to federate with some of them.

@rysiek considering how those two particular companies are completely at odds with my desire for a free internet, i wouldn't want to federate with them or expose any of my info (or the info of any other users of my instance) to them.


A lot of users came from FB/birbsite *because* they weren't comfortable with the way that these companies were exploiting their data

How big of a fuck-you to those users who trusted you would it be to gift-wrap all their data again and hand it back to the exact organizations that they intentionally left?

This is definitely how I would feel, as a new user coming from there. I abandoned ship specifically due to data protection & their policies on suspension & banning. I'd feel kicked if they just waltzed up here.

@bgcarlisle @rysiek i agree what the sentiment, but if your look at the absurd lengths a lot of these companies go to to scrape data, there is zero chance defederating from their main instance would stop them from accessing fedi users’ data. if that’s what they wanted they’d just setup some innocuous other instance and scrape from there. (i wouldn’t be surprised if they’re already doing so)

@rysiek On my side this is a big NO due to privacy reasons.

I don't want that my data go on their server to be sold after that... I'm not their product and from my point of view our users are not too 😉

@rysiek the social norms and values are so different we'd end up suspending them after a number of reports anyway.
We might federate with them on silance maybe.

@rysiek I would stop using and promoting the fediverse, if I would see twitter or facebook being promoted to federate with.

no to facist enablers!

I'm here to stay away from facebook, twitter, youtube, and their trolls. I'd move again, or give up completely on "social media".

also, this idea is *not* "complicated", nor "nuanced"; this is black&white, first principles.

@rysiek Wolf Howl would not federate with either site. It goes against the purpose of the fediverse and why we are present within it.

@naia what is the purpose of the Fediverse? Honest question. I have my own answer, of course, but I am curious about what others think.

@rysiek for me, it is to escape the likes of Facebook and Twitter. In order to have a decentralized social media platform where individual instances control their own content and set their own rules, but where one instance cannot entirely silence a user.

@rysiek maybe silence/suspend by default, and then work with allow-lists?

otherwise the amount of moderation-work would be overwhelming!

@rysiek Yes, since it's possible to defederate individual users as well. At least until that becomes too much of a headache, then I'd be more inclined to drop them wholesale.

@rysiek Not an admin, so I didn't vote, but I say no. Imo that could wind up exhausting the Fediverse not only in terms of resources, but also in cultural terms. Who wants that.

@rysiek I voted federate with both, but if you're interested in the more nuances answer:
I already filter out twitter stuff, so it's possible that I'd block Twitter. However, I think I would rather just quarantine them (and thus only send public posts) instead of completely blocking.
On FB there are a lot of people I left behind when moving here so I would probably be very strict in the traffic I allow and send. Maybe also quarantining, but if that means that I won't be able to interact with people there, I'd probably write a custom mrf and make the access very fine-grained.
In general I do think having them federate would be a win for decentralisation.
@rysiek People are probably avoiding Facebook more because associating one's real life personality with one's Fediverse personality would cause too much trouble.

@rysiek while I see some rationale of federsting with fb/twitter (allowing people to exit walled gardens without leaving their less savy friends) the main reason I use mastodon is precisely that people here are much nicer and culture is much better than on Facebook. I dont miss the social media torrent of updates, and politics, and problems and stuff.

@rysiek I'd rather unblock Gab than federating with the Birdsite or Facebook 🤢

@rysiek I would absolutely. They only thing those guys really have going for them is critical mass. Federating would be a fatal mistake, because once users realize how easy migrating to greener pastures is, the jig would be up.

@rysiek I actually would, but only to help my friends migrate onto new instances while retaining their old friends.

In other words, gradually siphon everyone out into fediverse proper.
Sign in to participate in the conversation

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!