Recent searches
Search options
@moderators What is your position on this? Speaking for myself, I have zero interest in making any connection with any Meta-owned properties.
[edited to add link:]
https://tech.lgbt/@mods/110567092695993475
LGBTQIA+ and Techtech.lgbt Moderators (@mods@tech.lgbt)We, the moderation and administration of tech.lgbt, are signing the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact in fellowship with our peer communities. (https://vantaa.black/pact)
There is over a decade of precedent that Facebook will not have users' best interests as their guiding principle but rather profit margins, if it joins the Fediverse.
We at tech.lgbt have long held the belief that corporation owned instances are a threat to the core of the Fediverse: freedom for users to be themselves and to be a part of their communities. The 2010s saw the loss of online freedom when the majority of the Web was consolidated into a few destinations, and Facebook entering here could lead us back to centralization. Furthermore, NDAs for server admins will constrain our sovereignty online by binding us legally from disrupting their business.
We are not products. We are people, and we do not welcome Facebook in this space.
#meta #FediPact #facebook #project92 #mastodon #fediverse #FediBlockMeta #FediAdmin #p92 #MastoAdmin
@moderators The Meta approach to Fediverse reeks of the old Microsoft "embrace, extend, and extinguish" approach to anything threatening their market dominance. I won't be a party to it.
Hello @SVChucko!
We’ve been looking into this for a while, and we've sent out a post with what we're thinking now: