Skip to main content


I'm thinking of temporarily removing threads.net accounts from the popular accounts list on #FediDB because their follower counts include non-federating accounts.

What do you think?

https://fedidb.org/popular-fediverse-accounts

#askFedi #fediDB #threads

  • Remove threads.net from the Popular Accounts (82%, 14 votes)
  • Keep threads.net accounts (17%, 3 votes)
17 voters. Poll end: 30 minutes ago

in reply to dansup

It's called "federation" for a reason, we should be open and welcoming to *anyone* who behaves.
in reply to CartyBoston

@CartyBoston But… Threads doesn't. Aside from transphobia and such they just even blacklisted the "caturday" hasthag. πŸ˜…
in reply to FediThing πŸ³οΈβ€πŸŒˆ

@FediThing @CartyBoston Don't get me started on the company itself. Meta only deserves one thing, and that is to be destroyed and split up in multiple new companies (favourably cooperatives) and those responsible put in front of a court for war crimes, among others. Including Zuckerberg.
in reply to CartyBoston

@CartyBoston @Natanox

Companies that own an instance decide how that instance is run. We need to block instances that are run dangerously by amoral companies.

People can move to different instances that are run responsibly, that's the idea of the Fediverse.

in reply to FediThing πŸ³οΈβ€πŸŒˆ

@FediThing @CartyBoston Indeed.

It's a moral problem that's extensively exploited these days. "Platforms" use both the lock-in effects as well as marketing and propaganda tactics to make people feel bad for not wanting to interact with the platform, shifting the focus on the loss of social interaction. Simultaneously the blame is also shifted, from the crappy dicks who run the platform to the individual who DARES to avoid the platform - which is reinterpreted as being anti-social.

in reply to Natasha Nox πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡¦πŸ‡΅πŸ‡Έ

@FediThing @CartyBoston The only solution to this is exactly what the Fedi does. Which is why Threads does NOT nor plans to ever allow moving accounts off of it.

It's here to exploit social behaviour, like Meta always does.

in reply to Natasha Nox πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡¦πŸ‡΅πŸ‡Έ

@FediThing @CartyBoston Unfortunately the only people who have the power to protect against it are people who also run big instances or even develop the software. And while @dansup has proven to be a good ddude with values and the ability to change his mind / apologize if shit hit the fan… @Gargron does not show any of it. Especially regarding Threads, at least not public. And who knows what was said under Meta's NDA…
in reply to FediThing πŸ³οΈβ€πŸŒˆ

@FediThing Tell that to Eugen… the "official" Mastodon app still throws everyone onto massoc. Because apparently a list or sth. like a short wizard that asks some questions about preferences is "too complicated for many people".
in reply to Natasha Nox πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡¦πŸ‡΅πŸ‡Έ

Yup, I opened an issue about this when it happened:

https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon-ios/issues/1023

I can see the argument for just suggesting one instance for people who don't want to do any choosing, but there's no reason that this has to be the biggest instance or even the same instance all the time.

There are so many other instances apart from m.s which have just as good a track record or better. A pool of those could be used, rotating randomly every so often.

That's what the Nextcloud website does when suggesting hosting companies, has a pool of good ones and randomly suggests one.

This entry was edited (20 hours ago)
⇧