As social.coop continues to hash out how to handle the prospect of a Facebook- / Meta-hosted Activity Pub app, members of our community are pulling together early examples of how other instances are responding.
Here's scicomm.xyz's statement: https://about.scicomm.xyz/doku.php?id=blog:2023:0625_meta_on_the_fediverse_to_block_or_not_to_block
And here's the statement from the anarchist / antifascist instance Kolektiva: https://kolektiva.social/explore
I just read through scicomm.xyz's statement on the stance they are taking regarding Facebook / Meta joining the fediverse (https://about.scicomm.xyz/doku.php?id=blog:2023:0625_meta_on_the_fediverse_to_block_or_not_to_block).
It usefully condenses many of the relevant issues, and I found it to be worthwhile reading.
Among other topics, the writeup by scicomm.xyz mentions the risk that others have noted of Facebook / Meta using an "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish" approach toward the Fediverse. I think this is very likely.
They also mention the possibility of a "Divide and Conquer" strategy, "by fragmentation sown from animosity and confusion". I'm more skeptical of this idea.
Worries that the Fediverse might become fragmented seem strange to me, because the Fediverse is *already* fragmented.
Instances differ in moderation policies and approaches, and the experience of the Fediverse is very different depending on just the size of your home instance.
There are curated lists of instances that host bad actors, and many instances already refuse to federate with the large instances. And yet it all more-or-less works.
The fact that this system basically works while being fragmented is one of its beauties.
