A community index of servers added a new rule recently, that requires every participant to defederate from Threads. Some admins are unhappy.

Server indexes of places for newcomers to join can be instrumental for Fediverse adoption. However, sudden rule changes can leave some admins feeling pressure to change policies in order to remain listed.

    • FiskFisk33@startrek.website
      534·
      9 months ago

      “the mass murderer have killed multiple people in Spain and Italy, but we can’t just assume he will do the same thing in France”

      • pingvenoEnglish
        525·
        9 months ago

        Sure, but this is Mastodon, not murders. Much lower stakes.

        • underisk
          283·
          9 months ago

          if the stakes are so low then blocking them is as low-stakes as not, so why make a fuss about it?

            • poVoq@slrpnk.net
              91·
              9 months ago

              Facebook allowed connecting with XMPP clients for a while and then cut off that access. While they were not the main offender compared to Google, they still did nothing but leech off the XMPP ecosystem until they decided it wasn’t in their interest any longer.

              • FaceDeer@fedia.io
                37·
                9 months ago

                I’m failing to see what’s wrong about this. They used XMPP and then stopped? That seems to be exactly what people angry about Threads federation want Meta to do with ActivityPub.

                • poVoq@slrpnk.net
                  71·
                  9 months ago

                  The point is that at no point in time where they actually interested in supporting the XMPP federation. It was only a short term tool for them to capture some audience that it would not have otherwise.

    • Ogmios@sh.itjust.works
      261·
      9 months ago

      Well sure MS-13 may be a brutal trafficking gang known for extreme violence, but they haven’t done anything to ME yet.

      • Otter@lemmy.caEnglish
        77·
        9 months ago

        I think this comment chain is going in a circle while everyone actually agrees with the underlying point.

        I cannot see anything bad here. Blocking an actively malicious actor should be the norm.

        It might be true that they aren’t ACTIVELY being malicious currently. It’s also true that they have a horrible history, and they will likely be actively malicious in the future.

        (I say ‘might’ because I seem to recall them being malicious towards the fediverse with secret meetings with admins, but I didn’t follow up on that)

      • iegod@lemm.ee
        25·
        9 months ago

        Wasn’t the original post amended to state it wasn’t intentional but rather a bug?