This bot publicly shames #fediverse accounts federating with f'book #threatds (misspell deliberate).
https://stop-using-threads.net/
Though this might seem laudable, we have concerns. Why list individual accounts? Isn't it better to shame instances?
Also the service appears to be Goo'-served, so could be #astroturf ie. false grassroots action, possibly to engineer public perception *against* such an initiative.
@emacs@emac.ch
@dsfgs many of us believe it's generally better to leave as much control in the hands of users, so in many cases it's better to have the instances only set policy when it comes to technical or legal issues, leaving that choice to users.
Of course that varies from instance community to instance community, but particularly on large instances it can be harder to propose one size fits all moderation if the user group is diverse and will have different things they want from their experience.
That being said, overall I think this is a bad idea merely because it adds noise, amounting to spamming the system.
@dsfgs I guess it all depends on what your personal ideas are about what the goals of this system should be. And I don't share your goals.
Mainly, yes a lot of people are passionate about things like Facebook track record, but that's completely uninteresting to others of us. We all have our different hobby horses, and that's not one that's universal here.
So I put it the other direction, it's a slap in the face to fedizens to demand this sort of imposition of values because that's exactly the kind of thing we came here to get away from, we're trying to get away from that kind of approach of sites like Facebook!
But, the nature of a federated system makes it possible for people with those different approaches to coexist. So long as we don't insist on the one size fits all approach.
@volkris
Falsebook is a #badActor. It drowns its users worse than #Gab and and is replete with sophisticated bots and algorithms designed to trap people and inflict targeted psychological trauma.
These are known facts about #Falsebook. There is no denying these facts. They are well documented and #whistleblowers and investigations have proven them.
By federating, non-limited by default with such a monopoly and bad actor, an instance *validates* the criminal #monopoly, and its conduct.
@dsfgs maybe in your eye one is validated through federation, but I would reject that interpretation of that network activity.
Any system like this will have bad actors.
It will also have different ideas about how they should be dealt with, and even the bad actors do bring value to users based on users' diverse wants from the system.
So again I'm pointing out that for all you wrote about Facebook being a bad actor, a lot of us don't care whether that's true or not. It's not the case to be made because it just doesn't matter to us.
Yes I know that matters a lot to you. I know that's your personal focus. I understand that.
But this system doesn't require us all to conform to that philosophy, and to me that's one of the most important parts about it.
@volkris
F'book = repression. Period. Falsebook have not and are not reforming. Just this week further evidence comes to light.
Its a classical #criminalMonopoly. A criminal enterprise down to its founding.
The very least a large instance can do is make federation opt-in and always limit them to only followers, DM only, but even this is #internetCancer to be honest.
By far the most sane thing an instance can do is block them at the network level.
(coming from we who didn't want Gab blocked)
@dsfgs not sure why you're harping on a line of argument that I've tried to clearly state doesn't really resonate for people who don't share your personal priorities.
It doesn't make a difference to the conversation so I don't know why you would keep pulling at that thread, pun intended.
Anyway I would thank you to not engage in Facebook style repression by demanding that sort of heavy-handed instance policy.
You end up looking an awful lot like them, which maybe would be something you would care about.
@volkris
Tolerating repression = represssion.
One cannot say that we, by not tolerating Falsebook repression, are ourselves being repressive. That's never been a proper argument.
When you are on the receiving end of FalseBook's repression do find us. We will be joining any balkanisation movement to break from instances that federate with the classically criminal enterprises such as FalseBook.
They represent the "#Extinguish" part in "#EmbraceExtendExtinguish".
@volkris
"particularly on large instances" <<< this.
Large instances are a problem in themselves, but in this context the responsible thing for a large instance to do to is block #threatds by default but allow individuals opt-in to federating *if they so* choose.
Anything other than this is deeply, deeply unethical and a slap in the face to fedizens.
F'book's track record of bad and unethical conduct goes back far. In many ways it is the reason Fediverse exists, to say 'no' to their system.