It got me to delete my Threads and Instagram accounts yesterday, even though I was mainly using them as placeholders at this point. My Facebook account has been deleted for many years.

Mastodon…this is the way!

it's with a heavy heart, but I am planning to suspend their federation in two weeks, unless they can explain the wording of their policy.

I simply cannot allow a service to federate which explicitly says targeting minority groups is allowed. It reads like Kiwi Farms.

I am generally extremely into open federation - my server has almost no blocks - but by far the largest ActivityPub service having these policies is - my opinion - not acceptable. And really sad.
cyberplace.social/@GossiTheDog…

Agreed that Meta's changes are troubling and concerning. So I would strongly urge you and any instance admin exposing their users to the harassment there to reconsider their alignment with Threads and defederate now .

That's expecially for you and mastodon.social. Think about the message that you're sending: "Instead of proactively protecting people on this instance, we'll wait for you to be harassed and then take action on individual harassers. And, we'll make that the default for new Mastodon users!"

There's a huge opportunity for Mastodon here if you take a courageous position. So please do!

@Gargron

The changes to the wording of the #moderation policies #Facebook and #Threads are deeply concerning to hear about, however, they feel more like they are openly admitting what has always been the case than any substantive change. The company has always had an internal policy, like most other corporate social networks, to allow #HateSpeech and other #misinformation to proliferate, as these drive the engagement metrics that drive revenue, on top of often aligning with the values of leadership.

At #TechHub, our policy has, so far, been a "wait and see" approach. We have not blocked Threads yet, but if the time comes when they do finally federate, if ever, we are committed to the plan of taking server level action should their lack of moderation become too much of a problem for us.

Either way, this only underlines the need to bring more people into the #Fediverse network, and away from the large corporate #SocialNetworking services.

@gelbphoenix

jointhefediverse.net/?lang=en-… 👍

Join the fediverse!

Learn about the fediverse and find your community.

^{jointhefediverse.net}

Eugen, the OWNER OF THREADS and the entire platform guidelines violate "our policies". It's not about a single account.

Do they still meet the federation requirements? .online and .social already don't federate with many instances that explicitly allow and/or even target certain audiences and content.

So the responsibility for moderating federated Threads posts/accounts passes to the (often unpaid, volunteer) moderators of instances that federate with them.

Shrewd move by Meta, then. 🙄

Any other instance with the lack of moderation that Threads has - and will have to a much, much larger extent after this change of policy - would have been defederated by the majority of other instances long ago.

With its open signups and federation with Threads, it seems likely that more and more instances will defederate from mastodon.social as time goes on.

That would be a great shame unless, of course, there are plans to sell it to Meta in due course.

@tom

i wish most admins on fedi would make a strong distinction between any speech (hate, misinfo etc) and unwanted tagging. as part of the open web, people can post whatever they want on their blog. the problem arises when we force people to see stuff they don't want to. the fedi avoids most of this by not having algos or ads. mods should be harsh on bothering others & fediblocking servers that don't police abusive accounts is also appropriate imo. but threads can't even tag us yet.

We really tried and gave them very much the benefit of the doubt to begin with

Unfortunately they threw it all away with that one change so all we can do now is act I guess

@Gargron if hate speech is so prohibited on fedi, i should be able to report it when i click on 'report this post'
rather than having to find another way to specify that it is a violation.

please, make this place safer before patting yourselves on the back for being the better platform

I left mastodon.social because you chose to cooperate with Meta from the beginning despite clear evidence they are not trustworthy - and you continue to federate with them despite clear evidence they are not trustworthy.

I appreciate the work you have done on behalf of the fediverse and wish you would be more discerning in who you partner with.

Sorry, I don't understand. So .social is blocking Threads?

That will be great!

Moderation policies in both facebook and instagram have been draconian in the level of unjust, but I cannot simply trust zuckerberg as he decides to undo the damage caused from such path, there are countless people that lost their accounts due to some word, there was even incidents of people getting banned over the usage of the word "dwarf" in public rpg themed groups, this level of unfairness was the principal reason why other platforms gained strength, in their quest to be as inclusive as possible they became the antithesis of it by punishing common users for not following the conventions of discourse due to their ignorance of the topic (which they reserve the right to disagree with anyways).

The point: zuckerberg can't expect people to believe his newfound pursuit of freedom when historically his platforms represented the opposite.

now would be the perfect time for Mastodon to prioritise features that marginalised communities have been asking for, around better privacy controls, retooting, etc.

I would love to see loud, affirmative commitment and action on these things from the Mastodon team

We are now two generations into 'reality tv', which set the ball in motion to conflate scripted conflict as reality which, in conjunction with religious fundamentalism, has fueled the ability of the conservative extreme to bend reality.

This is how deep fascism is nursed. What a waste, what a waste.

My instance is just me but I banned Threads immediately.

Meta's new policy of explicitly calling out gay/trans people as OK to insult is worse than even "free speech absolutism". It's the most extreme content policy I've ever read.

#politics

Or CherryPick or Misskey.

I like Mastodon, but there are other platforms with more options.

Tech-bros are not your friend. Those you share your society are your friends.

EVERYTHING you post and do while connected to Meta will be sold and trained on. EVERY scrap of data.

OK, a legitimate question: What is the threshold for Threads accounts being reported until you block and defederate from them?

I'm already seeing some chomping at the bit to start going after marginalized communities again.

How anyone can say this, watch #Meta behave in the poisonous way it always has, and not advocate blocking #Threads altogether mystifies me.

I mean, if Twitter were federated would that also be ok?

How vile do these corporations have to be before we stand up and say that's enough?

I fully agree with your statement. However, the fun fact is that according to a survey of the Penn State University, 75% of the Facebook users share articles without even reading them. I suppose they wont't even notice the absence of the fact check links. So the appalling lack of social media literacy is the real bad news.

psu.edu/news/research/story/so…

Social media users probably won’t read beyond this headline, researchers say | Penn State University

In an analysis of more than 35 million public posts containing links that were shared billions of times on the social media platform between 2017 and 2020, the researchers at Penn State found that around 75% of the shares were made without the poster…

^www.psu.edu