Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   chris@strafpla.net (chris@mstdn.strafpla.net)'s status on Tuesday, 13-Feb-2024 19:08:46 JST chris@strafpla.net

   • the roamer
   • Zatty pixellates :meowybara:
   • Fediverse News
   • Fediverse Developer Discussion
   • AP-AT-Bridge Group
   • Ryan Barrett

   @the_roamer @zatnosk @snarfed.org @activitypubblueskybridge @fedidevs @fediversenews Undecided on this but we had bridges / gateways to a lot of federated networks on the usenet and users did not consider this a problem with consent in principle. You don’t have to use it and your instance can block it.
   However, blueky could easily become one of the too big to block instances on the fediverse, but with a different culture concerning moderation (and archiving), and that may become a problem.

   • AP-AT-Bridge Group repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     shiri (shiri@foggyminds.com)'s status on Wednesday, 14-Feb-2024 12:42:48 JST shiri

     in reply to

     • the roamer
     • chris@strafpla.net
     • Zatty pixellates :meowybara:
     • Ryan Barrett

     @chris @the_roamer @snarfed.org @zatnosk I don't think "Too Big To Block" is really an argument... If people don't want to talk to Bluesky users, they can block Bluesky. If Bluesky is so uncontrollably toxic as to create a critical problem, then why would you not block those posts?

     The only time "Too Big To Block" really applies is the same time the people who aren't bothered by this... the people who prioritize getting as many people on the fediverse as possible to have as much reach as possible.