I think it’s pretty safe to say that the majority of us are here to avoid another corporate takeover of our preferred platforms. It would seem to me to be a tad irresponsible to allow Facebook into our space with open arms, allowing them to hoover up our data. I would love to keep using Lemmy.world, but will happily change instances if need be, and I feel many share that sentiment.

  • EnderMB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    34
    ·
    1 year ago

    Given that we’ve watched communities like Reddit become more closed, I would rather Lemmy not do the same. The best thing an instance can do is keep them on a very tight leash, and kick out at the first sign of a rule being broken.

    What Lemmy needs, above anything, is engagement. Be open to the users from Threads, instead of punishing them because you hate Meta. Many people joined Lemmy because the idea of the fediverse meant freedom to choose, and while instances are free to allow/deny who they want, it shouldn’t be a detriment to users that want to experience Lemmy.

    • laverabe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not how EEE works at all. Facebook will embrace Lemmy, extend/improve Lemmy, and then extinguish/disadvantage the native Lemmy community, until the Lemmy server serves so little of a purpose it is shut down.

        • angrymouse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Ahmm, lemmy.world is already federated with mastodon as well, fediverse is one network of federated instances, it is not one for mastodon and another for lemmy. You can interact with mastodon post already from here

    • ItsMeSpez@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Except that Threads is not going to engage mutually so this argument is moot. If we federate with Threads but they do not federate with us, what exactly to we have to gain from this besides Meta’s rage algorithms?

      • bluefirex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Great how everyone saw one post from Mosseri a week ago and decided to just ignore all following posts. The one-sided federation atm is TEMPORARY. They will fully federate in the upcoming months.

        • ItsMeSpez@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Then we shouldn’t even be considering our federation until they are willing to properly join the community.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Defederating Threads doesn’t make us a closed community. All that’s going to happen is we’ll basically end up on Threads without actually being on Threads. People will either migrate there or to an instance that doesn’t have Meta/Facebook everywhere.

    • krolden
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Theyre free to join an instance that isn’t owned by meta