I apologize if this has been asked before, but I’m wondering if it would be feasible to implement a new approach to defederation that offers the option of choosing between complete or partial defederation from another instance.

Currently, defederation blocks both the locally made posts on the defederated instance and its entire userbase. This can be excessive, and in many cases it may be better to block only the posts made on the other instance while still allowing its users to interact with the instance that defederated — user behavior may differ between their home instance and other instances. This partial defederation (or limited federation) would facilitate normal interaction without negatively affecting the content of a feed.

Problematic users could be managed on a case-by-case basis using bans, similar to how it is done for federated instances. Automated tools could simplify this process in the future. Complete defederation would still be necessary in extreme cases where no positive user interactions are expected, such as with instances that promote Nazism.

Instances are being forced to choose between a sledgehammer and nothing at all, and I think a compromise is warranted. I’m curious to read others’ thoughts on how to solve this existing challenge.

EDIT: I added a rough sketch that outlines the proposal. On the left side is the system as it works now and on the right side are two possible scenarios for limited federation (1 direction or bidirectional)

    • piece@feddit.itEnglish
      6·
      1 year ago

      The comment I read made it seem as some kind of pitiful faction war but it’s pretty understandable, maybe it could even have a positive impact on Lemmy as a whole

      • chaogomu@kbin.social
        8·
        1 year ago

        At this point, they might just be going the way of turning off federation completely, at which point they can have their little curated walled garden where no one can disobey without a full account ban, and then they will slowly cease to exist.

        • CherenkovBlue@iusearchlinux.fyi
          2·
          1 year ago

          The problem with “safe spaces”, as the beehaw defed post indicated that they wanted to be, is that it can rapidly turn into an echo chamber where opposing but legitimate viewpoints are removed. For this reason I like the fediverse, and wish beehaw good luck.

          • density@kbin.social
            21·
            1 year ago

            I think there is a role for “echo chambers”. Sometimes it’s good to have a common baseline of understanding assumed, because you can go into more depth in your perspective without having to rehash the basics.

            Like we are in an echo chamber here in that we are all kind of pro-fediverse. If this thread was full of people being like “well this sucks compared to instagram” etc, it would be less productive.