Reposting this from Threads, as people there were asking why some mastodon admins were defederating, and many there found it inexplicable, or even petulant: The fediverse (and all open systems) are about giving people choices, and giving communities power. Being able to block Facebook/Meta from connecting is a demonstration of that power …
@anildash This is really disingenuous, Anil. Meta hasn't caused unforgivable harm past tense, they continue today! Their regressive content moderation policies are incompatible with the community based safety of the fediverse. You should know better. Many servers have been defederated for far less. Framing this as a chance for them to do better is only possible with willful ignorance of the bigotry they enable today.
Any instance today with the same content moderation policies as Threads would be defederated immediately on grounds of transphobia. The fact this is even a debate underscores the inherit compromise of federating with Threads: they set the rules and we have to follow. Compromising your values to gain “validation” or “legitimacy” from Meta is a fools errand. I am disappointed in @Gargron and other admins who betray the safety of their trans users in exchange for proximity to power.
@mike@Gargron "Trans people are safe as long as admins have the ability to defederate from Threads even if they don't use that option to protect their trans users".
You're arguing about software functionality and I'm arguing about community safety. I'm arguing the admins should defederate from Thread for reasons they have defederated from other servers before. Meta shouldn't get an exemption for allowing transphobia.
@mike@Gargron I understand the Mastodon community is not homogenous. But you are being disingenuous because you and I both know the Mastodon server rules are regularly used to defederate from servers that do not moderate hate speech, as per the Mastodon Server Covenant. How many of the servers that supposedly follow this covenant servers allow Threads to federate?
I was unable to post on Instagram this morning because I have a link in my account to mas.to (my mastodon instance). No idea which one of these Meta is accusing mas.to of, but this is why you should not trust Meta or federate with anything they build. If they get to be the largest Mastodon server, then they can start dictating their regressive content moderation policies on the rest of the fediverse. I stand with my admin @trumpet and their decision to preemptively block any Meta instances.
@wiredfire Yes, I'm aware. I've moved accounts before. It's easy to move followers but you lose all your posts.
I find it frustrating that in the face of federating with a known transphobic server your response is "well you can always move". In my opinion you can either join in asking better of our admins or you can stay out of my mentions, please and thank you.
@wiredfire@enby_of_the_apocalypse@strathamer See, if I was having a discussion about content moderation I simply would not admit that Truth Social has a right to exist. No it doesn't. De-platforming works and we should do it to all racists, transphobes, and bigots. The idea they will spread their hate if de-platformed is a myth, and a dangerous one because it justifies allowing bigoted hate on social networks, which allows it to spread.
@nf3xn@dr2chase@dalias@trumpet The largest Mastodon instance that is run by the sole person who makes decisions about the software which every instance runs? Yes, I am complaining about that. Feel free to block me.
@nf3xn@dr2chase@dalias@trumpet You're trying to make this a debate about individual choices instead of content moderation policies and it isn't working. Mastodon.social has blocked many servers on the basis that they do not moderate transphobic content, but not Threads. Why?
@nf3xn@dalias@dr2chase@trumpet My own personal choice for using Facebook and Instragram is to stay in touch with my family. Many trans users chose Mastodon because of it's content moderation policies blocked entire servers that would not moderate transphobia. They should have a choice, just like I do. Federating Threads leaves them to block transphobia piecemeal, which is a huge burden. That's one of the main reasons why the content moderation policy is what it is today!
@wiredfire@enby_of_the_apocalypse@strathamer Deplatforming worked with Richard Spencer and Milo Yiannopoulos, who are now penniless and unable to spread hate. I don't think a conversation with someone who thinks Truth Social has "a right to exist" is a conversation conducted in good faith. Literally no private company has a right to exist! Least of all Truth Social!
@nf3xn@dalias@dr2chase@trumpet They do have a personal choice: they can join Threads. This isn't how community safety works, BTW. You could make this bad faith argument about any server that mastodon.social has blocked. "You're prohibiting the user's personal choice to interact with glindr.org". What a joke! You can always access these websites directly if you really want transphobic content.
@wiredfire Do I want people who spread hate to be hidden away on small backwater forums so they can't spread their hate to more people? Yes, absolutely.
@wiredfire I don't agree with government control over free speech. I support communities coming together and blocking, shaming, punching, and otherwise stigmatizing all bigots so they feel unwelcome in society. That's what I am trying to advocate for. I am trying to argue for admins to continue doing something they are already doing (block servers that do not moderate transphobia) so that trans people continue to be safe on the fediverse.
@wiredfire You can either join in solidarity or you can continue arguing that transphobes and bigots should be welcomed in society for some hairbrained reason that you dreamed up for some misguided idea of "openness". I'm not even arguing that Threads should be removed from the web! We simply do not have to federate with it!