@djvdq@stux ah yeah, they should be jailed or deald with in less traditional manner, like making them unable to go out of their homes and all their devices should be taken from them.
@stux I understand people have strong opinions about Meta but people really need to take a hard look at those who were threatening people with violence, some of the posts were absolutely horrible.
@surak@stux the meta thing really feels like the “villain of the week” nonsense Twitter was known for..
I get the concerns , I do, but come on.. extending ActivityPub to something Meta will push is amazing. We can offer a hand at last to the “masses” and either walk alongside them or tempt them over to social-good spaces over for-profit.
What a vote of confidence in the technology as well!!
@wiredfire@stux To me the most obvious part is:
We don't know anything yet.
Only that they are developing an app that will speak ActivityPub.
We don't know if it will be implemented completely.
We don't know if they will allow account migration (probably not, and that would be a deal breaker).
@surak@stux@TomSwirly the NDAs make sense from a business angle, I get that they’re not wanting to show their hand as yet.
I’m more intrigued that they’re wanting to actively engage with some fedi admins.
Either way I’m more interested in having a route for the people who are less technical or otherwise interested enough to have a gateway to decentralised platforms. That is a HUGE opportunity.
A gateway would allow people to leave FB with their data. But that will never happen.
Facebook is a morally evil company. Their goal will be to make as much money from the Fediverse as they can, by any means, honorable or not, and our ethos, our needs, our wants, will be worthless.
@TomSwirly@surak@stux I’m no fan of Facebook, but I am a fan of interoperability & removal of barriers.
Facebook opening up to ActivityPub gives people more access to participate & interact with fedi. Or at least it would if we weren’t seeing the preemptive blocks.
I’m interested in people and how this could open things up for folk who aren’t technical / in the know enough to “get it”.
Prising open siloed corners of the web to interact outside themselves is also tremendous.
@TomSwirly@surak@stux but I get that you and I are going to disagree on this, and that is absolutely ok.
It’s a big fedi. There’s space for folk and communities to isolate themselves from it and places for those who want to explore how this goes. That’s the beauty of it. We have that choice and the option.
@surak@stux Worse: It's the world of free and open source software, so some people realise they can have an impact and therefore start sending out death threats to the amazing people who sacrifice all their spare time for others 😓
I don't yet know on which planet that sort of logic makes any sense, but I think ESA and NASA are investigating it.
@surak the idea that this is somehow fundimentally different from Twitter is an ansinie, albeit attractive, idea. people here just have different motivations.
@stux holy shit man. Im so sorry you went through that. People dont realise you're basically doing volunteering work and out of the kindness of your heart.
Hope you wont have to deal with this kind of people anymore. I wouldnt know how to handle it besides insta-banning them.
@stux Jesus, I'm shocked this has lead to death threats. Some people see every single thing in their life as an existential crisis that requires a violent response. It's horrifying.
>"Another thing I would like to adres is the death threats against mods and admins in the Fediverse..."
In the US it is against the law to make a credible death threat. As a user, I've had a few and I report them to the FBI. They take that very seriously and you never know what else is going on with someone like that so it is best to report it to the authorities who have the resources to deal with it.
I would be surprised if the Netherlands doesn't have similar laws on that.
@stux the whole Meta debacle is running a risk of breaking fedi before they even come onboard.. people are so worried about “embrace expand extinguish” that they’re burning down their own house before Zuck can.
It’s truly crazy.
I’m filtering and muting my own timeline to see if I can chip away at the noise and find that really friendly, welcoming, community we knew just a few months ago.
@wiredfire
I’m sure I’m not the only one who suspects the powers that be atop and behind meta are watching all the sturm und drang with more than a little schadenfreude, if not outright glee.
@qurlyjoe@WideAperture@stux wouldn’t surprise me in the least. But then I’m open the the outside possibility that Zuck sees the writing on the wall and is pivoting. I’m likely wrong, but I’m up for seeing how it pans out.
@stux Since you invited talking, I'll have one simple question.
Why is it "let's welcome them in and wait to see if they do something bad to see if we need to kick them out" but not "let's watch from a distance what they are doing and see if they're really alright before letting them in"?
This way they can use ActivityPub, and everyone has less to worry about, right? Where am I going wrong?
My question is more about how the issue is framed by admins to the users of the fediverse.
Instead of saying "we're pro until we need to not be", saying "we're apprehensive but not de facto dismissive" (paraphrase as needed) could work PR wonders.
Maybe that's what's being said and I'm interpreting it in a more alarming way than needed but given what everyone knows about Meta, some apprehension is warranted I'd say.
@stux It really is a shame you were getting death threats. Of the time I've spent on here I've seen almost no one who's vibe would raise those kind of red flags.
My intuition tells me that it is a group of bad actors vilifying the Fediverse... throwing poison into the punchbowl as it were.
I am one of the strongest anti-corp advocates out there, and personally believe Meta has no business here at all. Their values won't change.
I know the Admins aren't welcoming them in with open arms... I expect the conversation was more tech/impact based on the current Fediverse.
You asked if Stux knows of specific death threats, and implied this is made up. Now you're moving the goal posts. That's just crap, my friend.
Stux did not say he personally got death threats, nor that they came from .art. He mentioned death threats against mods and admins on fedi.
If you can't get yourself to acknowledge that death threats are not an acceptable way to react to a conversation, then maybe you have some soul-searching to do.
@rysiek@ifixcoinops Stux phrased his comments in a way that implies that he had received death threats from the admin or a user of .art, and that this somehow excused or justified his decisions and behaviors.
Perhaps he didn't mean to do this, but his choice of language has consistently shifted the blame for actions he took on to other people.
This, to me, is concerning. I am glad I do not depend on him as an admin.
@ajroach42 I did not read it that way at all. I don't really see how it could be read that way. But if anyone read it that way, the right way to react is first asking if this is what he meant. Not going all "shady-ass games" on the thread, as that only escalates an already very heated situation.
And I think we can all agree that the situation needs to become less heated, pronto.
@ajroach42@ifixcoinops (I am making te same assumption, no explicit mention of pronouns on the profile)
I've seen abusive language from all directions over the last few days. Stux at least apologized publicly for some of it. Does not make it okay, of course, but it's a step.
People got all sorts of angry, and did all sorts of very unexcellent things. And now we all have to live with the consequences. So I will do my best to push back against any escalation I see. Because we can't afford it.
The fediverse is already pretty fragmented, that's part of what makes it work. I'm here to build a community, I'm not here to provide a neutral utility.
I'm trying to make it easier for people to self host, so that conversations like this become less significant.
Yes fedi is already fragmented. But this feels different.
It feels, sorry to put it so bluntly, like admins holding grudges and acting on them, with communities turning into mobs and cheering and egging them on.
Stux's block of .art is a great, extremely sad example of exactly that. But it did not happen in a vacuum.
It's not about a neutral utility, it's about not acting out mob mentality.
I am not personally accusing you of it, I am saying this how last few days feel like.
@rysiek Sure, tensions are high and people are holding grudges, but I think that it's disingenuous to ignore the facts that
Stux, the admin of the instance you're using, instigated a lot of this behavior by agreeing to speak with facebook under an NDA.
Stux exacerbated these tensions by acting out against his critics, unilaterally suspending another large instance, and then blaming the admin of that instance. Then repeatedly doubled down on claims that the admin was "nasty" (a term which is often used in sexist contexts).
Stux runs some of the largest instances on the fediverse.
It's not like people suddenly just decided to start a fight. They are specifically responding to a difficult, tense situation, and to the poor way one of the people at the center of it handled this tense, difficult situation.
If a smaller instance admin had started this kind of drama, I would have already defederated and moved on with my life.
> 2) Stux exacerbated these tensions by acting out against his critics
Critics who kept insisting, without proof and after his explicit, public denial of this, that he did did attend and sign. Which again, I have no reason to believe he did, after his unambiguous denial.
@rysiek@ajroach42 not firmly siding with violence brokers, data and agency thieves woulda gone a much longer way in calming the waters all around
being accused of sitting in on the bad faith NDA is damn near immaterial when you are one of the biggest voices with the biggest impact saying "come on yall it's not actually Facebook, give hate a chance guys"
@controlfreak see, this is exactly why I suggested fedi admins need to maybe talk out of band about this.
I am trying to lower the temperature and convince people to come to a table and talk some basic things out. Doing it with an audience means others can jump in and start escalating things again…
Fedi Admins (or at least StatusNet admins) used to use a mailing list. It's still running on my server, last used in 2013 by about 25-30 instance admins. Looking at the membership is a blast -- some are still active in the #Fediverse, but I don't know if they're still running instances.
Looks like the mailing list fell out of favour, replaced by an IRC/XMPP bridged chatroom.
Anyway, don't use it, I don't think my server can handle the 1000s of admins today.
@ajroach42 no doubt about that. And as I said before in this thread I think, explanation is not a justification. I am not trying to justify Stux's actions and words, I want to be very clear about that.
But he did apologize. Which again, does not wipe the slate clean. But it does count for something, one can hope.
And I'm sure there are other people that might have a bad aftertaste in their mouths after what they said over the last few days. I know I am one of them.
@stux I don't actually understand what is happening. In just a few words, toots are "saying" some fedi admins held a meeting with Meta staff and "signed" a NDA. Is any of this true? What do you know?
@stux
Ok. So what people are concerned about is the NDA.
This has to do with the big fish eating the little ones, and I'm sure you understand this.
On the other side, since you were in the meeting (am i right?), you know about what can't be revealed. So, in this matter, and according to your own judgement, is this related to pure technical reasons, meaning, develpoment of software, infrastructure and such, so that (in appearence) won't hurt the community?
And I ask this, because since this is a HUGE company that will join the fediverse, it is important we all know about the implications and even if this is viable in a long term.
@stux Nobody is perfect Stux, at least you are willing to talk unlike many in our current society. Small mistakes within a tapestry of life barely show when you stand back at look at all of your collective threads woven together. Instead... it offers character to the whole piece.
@stux I think just ignore these .art people at this point. They still have their pitchforks out and want to keep the drama going because not everyone signed onto their purity pledge.
@stux
No worries 🙏
Have a mistake it's normal, be aware of it and admit it, require humanity and kindness.
I agree that always the way is talk. :ablobcatheartsqueeze:
@stux You may say it's "misinformation", but speculation was bound to happen. The way, how the meeting with meta representatives went, was shady at best.
Also please start to account for the perspectives, where people are coming from and how others may percieve your actions (when in doubt, ask questions). I do understand, that seemingly unjustified criticism hurts, but being that reactionary and quick with your judgement about others, only causes more problems than solving them.
@stux which bit is misinformation? Apologies for drilling down but i'm not seeing specific people being named here so forgive me for not knowing who said what.
This part make it sounds like admins are corrupt and accepting money from Meta when it was just a meeting, no one is buying the fediverse.
I’m also not sure about the "clandestine" part. It’s not a secret that they met, only the content of the meeting is secret and under an NDA. It is also like basic procedure for any meeting with a big corpo. Especially when you’re talking about an unreleased product.
The basic facts are :
Meta invited a few big actors of the fediverse for a meeting
Makes sense. They’re implementing a federation feature, make sense that they’d want the input of a few actors who already run federated social network.
Meta’s condition to the meeting is an NDA
Kinda sucks. Totally fair to refuse an NDA. But also normal procedure for a corpo, no need to shame people who did sign the NDA.
Some admins accepted the NDA some didn’t (and didn’t join the meeting)
And the reactions from the most extreme people were like:
Accusing them of treason
For simply being in a meeting call with some Meta representative.
Accusing them of selling-out the fediverse, their instances/users or accepting money
This is completely wild and based on nothing
Shaming them for signing an NDA
Instead of shaming Meta for demanding one in the first place.
Shaming people who DIDN’T sign the NDA and DIDN’T meet, just because they were name-dropped in some thread
Absolutely wild
And the dot art admins are not innocent in that libel and harassment campaign. Their messages are encouraging it and certainly not helping people to clear up misunderstandings.
@stux she was literally paraphrasing Byron saying "...if they do find success and make billions - why would some instances not want to carve out a piece of that to earn a living wage and run a legit business" https://universeodon.com/@supernovae/110557398469799043
@stux I understand things can get heated and not everyone is self reflected. Some don't know better.
But if people send DEATH THREATS it's over. People who do this need to be blocked in my opinion. Misinformation is never okay, too.
@stux Jeez, I decide to check on what's going on in the fediverse/microblogging thing for the first time and people are having death-threats drama? Holy hell. Can someone of you kind folks fill me in? What was all of this about?
@stux I am so disappointed in your handling of this, and this apology is no exception.
You're still pointing the finger at others instead of owning your own actions. And I include in that your decision to talk with Meta under NDA.
I'm not here to argue with you about this, but I do feel the need to speak out, to support others who feel as I do.
@stux I am so disappointed in your handling of this, and this apology is no exception. You're still pointing the finger at others instead of owning your own actions. And I include in that your decision to talk with Meta under NDA. I'm not here to argue with you about this, but I do feel the need to speak out, to support others who feel as I do. Jun 20, 2023, 11:34 · · 0 · 0
stux⚡ @stux It’s kinda sad to see people think I’m ’bribed’ by Meta.. I have not signed anything, I did not attend anything from them nor did I accept anything but still the worst is assumed when I don’t agree on blocking a still in development project that we don’t even know the (domain)name from right away I don’t have any love for Meta or any of such companies whatsoever, that’s why I’m putting all I have in these platforms and guard it with my life so don’t expect Meta to get a ‘free pass’ on anything Jun 19, 2023, 09:12 · · 17 · 0 mozillafoundation giphy misinformation alert
@paul@stux Thank you for the correction! I will update my post to reflect it, and I apologize for my mistake.
Doesn't change my feelings about his handling of the whole affair.
@stux I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your intent is good here. In that spirit...
You may well be right that there are other people involved in this debate who are behaving poorly.
But sometimes you have to accept that you're not the right person to address that.
You disqualified yourself from being that person by how you reacted to it.
That you continue to lob criticism at the other side suggests that you don't get that.
An apology with a "but" isn't an apology.
Add comment