this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2023
649 points (100.0% liked)

Chat

7500 readers
4 users here now

Relaxed section for discussion and debate that doesn't fit anywhere else. Whether it's advice, how your week is going, a link that's at the back of your mind, or something like that, it can likely go here.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
remington@beehaw.org
649
non-stickied PSA: Beehaw has signed the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact (beehaw.org)
submitted 1 year ago by alyaza@beehaw.org to c/chat@beehaw.org
181 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

although this is unlikely to substantially and directly impact us and is a more immediate concern for Mastodon and similar fediverse software, we've signed the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact as a matter of principle. that pact pledges the following:

i am an instance admin/mod on the fediverse. by signing this pact, i hereby agree to block any instances owned by meta should they pop up on the fediverse. project92 is a real and serious threat to the health and longevity of fedi and must be fought back against at every possible opportunity

the maintainer of the site is currently a little busy and seems to manually add signatures so we may not appear on there for several days but here's a quick receipt that we did indeed sign it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] alyaza@beehaw.org 61 points 1 year ago (1 children)

counterpoint:

  1. we don't like Meta
  2. we have very specific goals on this instance that Meta is totally antithetical to
  3. we're quite open about not being open-fed with everyone and this is not out of character nor a contradiction of previous blocks we've made
  4. our priorities are not "fediverse first" or "ActivityPub first", they're Beehaw first. the fediverse and ActivityPub are mostly tools for us to an end, and we don't accept some obligation to prioritize the greater health of those over our own thing.
  5. even if you don't care about the rest of that simple logistics prevail here--we absolutely don't want to be responsible for potentially tens or hundreds of millions of additional users. that is not a thing we can ever commit to, and we will almost certainly sooner shut down the instance or completely defederate than eat that influx (particularly with Lemmy's limitations right now).

overall, i would say this falls into the camp of "not a thing we're realistically going to reconsider".

[โ€“] static@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

our priorities are not "fediverse first" or "ActivityPub first", they're Beehaw first.

Ok, that's where I'm in another camp, and that's ok, we can disagree on goals.