Kev Quirk (@kev@fosstodon.org)
fosstodon.org
Attached: 1 image Yeah, that's gonna be a hard pass from me thanks, Rachel. Zero interest in having a conversation with #Meta "off the record" or otherwise. Sharing this purely to be as transparent as possible with our members.

The exchange is about Meta’s upcoming ActivityPub-enabled network Threads. Meta is calling for a meeting, his response is priceless!

  • Niello@kbin.social
    19·
    1 year ago

    If that’s the case then there’s no need for it to be off-record. Unless the conversation of what you pointed out is open to scrutiny it shouldn’t happen.

    • Wirrvogel@feddit.de
      15·
      1 year ago

      This is the real point here. If this is a legit talk about legit points then it can be open for everyone to see.

      Starting talks with Meta behind closed doors can never happen. If they have something to say or ask then they can do it publicly.

      I am all for talk, because that’s the part that hurts no one, but make it as transparent as humanly possible from all angles.

      I also want to know what “the enemy” is up to, so invite them to talk as much as possible, we do not need to agree to anything just because we were talking/listening.

      • TheYang
        1·
        1 year ago

        This is the real point here. If this is a legit talk about legit points then it can be open for everyone to see.

        And this is a point I agree with btw. That’s a point I kinda missed, and while I can kinda understand Metas reluctance (they may want to be able to show Beta Apps or Mockups etc, and not want that to get out before its time), Metas History certainly is enough to stick to your point on this and go with an “I’d love to talk on the record, sure, but not off”