• jafo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    (Apparently) Unpopular Opinion: I think defederating Threads is the wrong move, because it just locks people into Threads. If people on Twitter had the ability to move to Mastodon AND still interact with all the people they did before, I think we would have seen even more people move. The only reason I still check twitter at all is because I have a few close friends who didn’t move. Meta is likely going to have big adoption of people who aren’t ready to go to Mastodon, but are interested in getting out of the dumpster-on-fire that twitter seems to continue to be. But blocking those people from being able to join the more popular Lemmy instances, given no actual policy violations, just will keep people in Meta that otherwise could leave. With the “however” being: It’s not quite clear to me that Threads users will be interacting with Lemmy as much Mastodon, if Threads were a Reddit replacement, it’s more directly connected.

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

      Being the “Ban Happy” socal media is a bad thing and an even worse reputation.

      I debate if its a good thing to let FB just have free content with asterisks as I have no idea whitch way the cup of users will spill

      EDIT: FB is a parisite that has a small enugh heart to use agressive tactics like Embrace Extend Extinguish, be careful if we do let them in and always be ready to shut that door)

      Another thing, lemmy.ml, reddit, twitter, (tiktok for good mesure) as well as Facebook and sons (and likely more) have sensorius admins, moderating above what most users want and warping conversations to pretend like this is what people are saying online and nothing more nor less”. To be overly flippant: “lol problem child blocked other problem child”

      either way, do what you think is right,

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

        That’s an interesting point, one of the reasons I chose lemmy.world was that it wasn’t ban-happy.

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

      I agree with you on all of that, though I have a feeling that it’s overly idealistic and optimistic

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

        You probably aren’t wrong about it being overly idealistic and optimistic. :-(

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

      The problem isn’t with the user base. It’s with Meta and their business practices. People very simply do not trust Meta or Facebook and with good reason.

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

        Sure, I have no love of Meta either, which is why I would love for people to have an easy escape hatch via the Fediverse…

      • alphalyrae@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s exactly it. Deleted my Instagram account when I learned they signed me up for a Threads account automatically. Haven’t used Insta in years, but Mark says I have to have a Threads account. So Fuck Zuck.

    • Cyyy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      perspective: if i can still reach everyone on the fediverse with threads… why should i switch to lemmy and co? there is no incentive for it. so 99% will not do it if they don’t have to or get a incentive from it.we don’t get something from it, but facebook does (userdata and money).

      so its a one sided deal where only facebook wins and we lose in the end.