I apologize if this has been asked before, but I’m wondering if it would be feasible to implement a new approach to defederation that offers the option of choosing between complete or partial defederation from another instance.

Currently, defederation blocks both the locally made posts on the defederated instance and its entire userbase. This can be excessive, and in many cases it may be better to block only the posts made on the other instance while still allowing its users to interact with the instance that defederated — user behavior may differ between their home instance and other instances. This partial defederation (or limited federation) would facilitate normal interaction without negatively affecting the content of a feed.

Problematic users could be managed on a case-by-case basis using bans, similar to how it is done for federated instances. Automated tools could simplify this process in the future. Complete defederation would still be necessary in extreme cases where no positive user interactions are expected, such as with instances that promote Nazism.

Instances are being forced to choose between a sledgehammer and nothing at all, and I think a compromise is warranted. I’m curious to read others’ thoughts on how to solve this existing challenge.

EDIT: I added a rough sketch that outlines the proposal. On the left side is the system as it works now and on the right side are two possible scenarios for limited federation (1 direction or bidirectional)

  • Bizzle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Beehaw feels like it’s ran by power tripping mods hiding behind toxic positivity and I’m not sad they defederated. I wouldn’t denigrate anybody for preferring it but I personally like a little more freedom.

    • density@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I am not totally against or in favour of what they are doing and I can’t even say what side I tip to. I feel very 50/50.

      I think it is in a “meta” way useful for the community, especially those of us (like me) new to the fediverse, to see it. However it goes, we can look and see and form opinions and learn. If it is a mistake, it’s a mistake that is inevitable. The capacity is built into the tools and someone was going to use it.

      I only wish I knew how or where some sort of… journalism?.. record? was being kept so that things could be understood later by the people not here to see it. So that the same mistakes don’t have to happen every 6 months.

    • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      At the very least this move highlighted a big problem with the Fediverse that needs to be ironed out. So I guess that’s good.

    • DarkGamer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It seems like defederating harms the ones who do it, as it provides incentives for users who want to access both servers to go to a 3rd party. From kbin I can currently see both.