This is not means for control seizure; in fact, barely any Lemmy admins can afford to exercise their powers against users, as everyone can effortlessly move to another instance.
This is a matter of protection, and you can’t fight Meta without it.
It’s like doing nothing with wolves attacking sheep, because “if you attack wolves, you won’t be that different from them”. No. We should do it and we have users’ support - and the best admins can do is open a vote, which was conducted on many instances (and had pretty much one outcome: defederate).
Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org 9 months ago
I find it bizarre you think the mere possibility of users from a big corporate service being able to communicate with the fediverse is akin to wolves attacking sheep.
If you really need your echo chamber to be free of people who use Meta servers, you could just block them as a user without mandating everyone else do so too.
Sanyanov@lemmy.world 9 months ago
There’s nothing wrong with the people.
There is a lot wrong with Meta.
Single-user effort will only get you so far; blocking Threads individually will break user experience (as most interactions, not just posts, will originate from Threads), and embracing Threads will inevitably lead to downturn in Fedi-native communities, further drying what just began to grow.
I can block content from Threads, but I cannot block the influence Threads exert on fedi. This is why servers need to defederate - to protect and preserve the community from any influence Zuck can singlehandedly exert.