• JanoRis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Sounds kinda like they are trying to grab “power” aka. growing their community more than others through exclusivity.

    Well if that turns out to be the case other communities can probably just block them in return, but still not a fan of that development

    • falconfetus8@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      I got that vibe when I saw that they intentionally keep their rules vague, to make them harder to evade. That just sounded to me like a recipe for power tripping.

    • maynarkh@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Isn’t federation symmetrical? So if they defederate most of the Fediverse, they will not be able to interact with it?

      I think it’s logical to keep it that way.

      • XanXic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        2 years ago

        They’re prompting the devs to make defederation one way. So they can block the fediverse at large from interacting with them but their users still have access to everything. Sets a bad example. The pitch is a pooled community. Not a series of tiny insulated Reddits using the same software

      • AntY@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        I agree. It makes it cost a bit more to defederate and therefore more valuable to keep everything open and available. The best thing with reddit was that it was a one-stop shop while it’s a bit more confusing with this federation stuff. If this defederation wasn’t a two-way street, it would make for weird exclusive instances that could thrive on others content without contributing.