@sam @Matt_Noyes @emi @hollie @django @dphiffer I got a report from Ryan that social.coop seems to have blocked Bridgy Fed and snarfed.org, looking into it, I don't think we decided to do this?
-
In #Flancia we'll meetreplied to In #Flancia we'll meet last edited by
@sam @Matt_Noyes @emi @hollie @django @dphiffer https://social.coop/admin/instances/snarfed.org shows that snarfed.org was limited pending community discussion -- I think this might have been a quick reaction to the original announcement of Bridgy Fed?
-
Sam Whitedreplied to In #Flancia we'll meet last edited by
@flancian @Matt_Noyes @emi @hollie @django @dphiffer I vaguely remember talking to someone about this but can't remember why or what the discussion was, I have a vague feeling that he told people that he wouldn't respect their wishes not to have his bridge suck up and republish their data and that he wasn't going to respect #nobot and the like. Grain of salt though, I don't really remember the details.
-
In #Flancia we'll meetreplied to Sam Whited last edited by
@sam @Matt_Noyes @emi @hollie @django @dphiffer that might be what we thought was happening but I'm pretty sure it's not what's happening, Ryan seems to be very into supporting the opt-in and opt-out mechanisms that people want.
I would like to lift this limit as I don't think it was validated by a community vote. I don't see a vote in https://www.loomio.com/d/W6tL5cvp/comment/3054315.
Thoughts?
-
In #Flancia we'll meetreplied to In #Flancia we'll meet last edited by
-
Sam Whitedreplied to In #Flancia we'll meet last edited by
-
Sam Whitedreplied to In #Flancia we'll meet last edited by
-
In #Flancia we'll meetreplied to Sam Whited last edited by [email protected]
@sam @Matt_Noyes @emi @hollie @django @dphiffer I understand but I don't think it's fine to limit these domains indefinitely for the whole of social.coop because some people don't like cross-posting; not being able to interact with users from the bridge or my developer acquaintance is surprising behavior for me as a social.coop user at least.
-
Sam Whitedreplied to In #Flancia we'll meet last edited by
@flancian @Matt_Noyes @emi @hollie @django @dphiffer I disagree; if that's indeed what's happening and he is (or was) sucking up everybodies stuff without consent then the *only* way to protect our users is to limit and let them decide if they want to follow or not. They can always explicitly visit the profile and hit the "show me" button or whatever if they want to opt-in to it.
That being said, if it's opt-in now I don't see any reason not to unlimit.
-
djangoreplied to In #Flancia we'll meet last edited by
-
@flancian @Matt_Noyes @emi @hollie @django @dphiffer I can't even find the limit or report now (*sigh* mastodon search tools). Was it me that did the limit? I have a vague memory of the name so I'm assuming it was, but I can't find it. If so, my apologies because I'm assuming this was something for the next meeting that I then forgot about.
-
In #Flancia we'll meetreplied to Sam Whited last edited by [email protected]
@sam @Matt_Noyes @emi @hollie @django @dphiffer you did fine I think btw, and you did bring it up in the CWG meeting I'm pretty sure. Opening the Loomio thread made sense, it's just that I think the thread showed there's a split in the community. Full disclosure: I acknowledge I'm more pro-bridges than most in the instance probably, but I do think it's important not to block bridges from people who are trying to do cross posting right.
-
Sam Whitedreplied to In #Flancia we'll meet last edited by [email protected]
@flancian @Matt_Noyes @emi @hollie @django @dphiffer oh! Sorry, that loomio link went to some random post about bluesky (also *sigh* at how much I continue to hate loomio), but the second time it went to the correct place and I see that this is in fact the correct discussion. Refreshing my memory now.
-
@flancian @Matt_Noyes @emi @hollie @django @dphiffer ahhh yes, okay, I remember this now. Sorry, it's probably on me for not following up with a proper proposal.
So my thought is that we should see what has changed (if anything), and then update the community and hold a vote on whether to open it back up, limit, or suspend. In the mean time we should keep the limit IMO since that's what the community has voted to do for other bridges, so it seems like a sensible default.
-
In #Flancia we'll meetreplied to Sam Whited last edited by
-
Sam Whitedreplied to In #Flancia we'll meet last edited by
@flancian @Matt_Noyes @emi @hollie @django @dphiffer I think this is the threads vote:
Discussion: Support the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact
For some time, there have been rumors that Meta (Facebook) has plans to impose itself on the Fediverse. These rumors have recently been confirmed, with the news that Meta is developing a clone of Mastodon, referred to as "Project 92", "Barcelona", or "Threads", and that it has had a meeting with the administrators of several large Mastodon instances, possibly including Eugen Rochko, while silencing them with a non-disclosure agreement.Meta is an oligopoly that has aggressively sought to control social media, through absorption of other social media companies, and through policies of "embrace, extend, and extinguish", as with the RSS and XMPP protocols. Meta, through Facebook, is infamous for condoning the spread of far right ideology and of dangerous misinformation.There have been calls for pre-emptively blocking Meta's project. In particular, @[email protected], administrator of a small Mastodon instance, beach.city, has proposed the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact.https://fedipact.online/I see our best hope in collective resistance.Therefore, I would like us to discuss whether we should support this move, and if so, how best to do so. As a starting point for discussion, I suggest the following:
Social.Coop commits to blocking any Fediverse instances that Meta creates.
We, as a body, sign the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact.
We follow up by collectively drafting and issuing a public statement.
(As I have not been active in Social.Coop discussions, I hope that the way I am presenting this is appropriate, and I welcome constructive criticism.)Loomio (www.loomio.com)
There was also one for bluesky that I'm still looking for.
-
-
In #Flancia we'll meetreplied to Matt Noyes last edited by
@Matt_Noyes @sam @emi @hollie @django @dphiffer thanks, I think this is a reasonable way forward.
Having said that, please bear with me here It seems we blocked two domains based on vibes/rumors and now we are going to go through a full vote to unlimit them, so there's an asymmetry in process that's leaning conservative here. Just calling it out, it's fine if people want to be conservative (I don't in this case, but it's reasonable in some cases).
-
Sam Whitedreplied to In #Flancia we'll meet last edited by
@flancian @Matt_Noyes @emi @hollie @django @dphiffer I don't think it was vibes/rumors, it was based on his own blog post about it and what the community has voted on in the past for similar situations.
Either way though, I feel like we should be at least a bit conservative with anything that makes it easy for corporate social media to vacuum up our users posts personally (though maybe we should also be quicker with a followup on loomio; sorry!)
-