r o w . ᚂone of the biggest problems with the fediverse (and federation in general) is the idea that a large-scale universal social network akin to centralized, corporate platforms such as twitter is realistically possible or even desirable when you don't have to spend much time around here to learn that is certainly not the case. if anything the fediverse seems to be built more on the concept of defederation than federation. there are dipshit keyboard warriors all over this network that spend most of their time just trawling through communities (that they often have little or no interaction with) to squash them down into their personal idea of what the fediverse-at-large should be -- which inherently goes against the entire concept. yes, blocking and defederation are key features of AP that help protect people's privacy and shape their experience the way they wish, but when we have professional wokescolds campaigning for the wholesale shunning of instances off (nearly) the entire fediverse then the veneer is stripped.
instances aren't meant to just be nodes in a universal network, gateways to other nodes, or fallbacks in the case of network failures -- they are independent, standalone communities interacting and forming affinities with each other as they see fit. to me, it seems better to embrace this structure rather than pointlessly attempting to "network" with users who have no interest in interacting in good-faith.
it seems to me the ideal solution is to operate on the assumption that all instances are hostile until proven otherwise, and to only choose to federate with instances where it makes sense to, forming a disconnected graph of patchwork "fediverses."
tl;dr -- death to the fediverse, let a thousand fediverses bloom.
nyanide :nyancat_rainbow::nyancat_body::nyancat_face:
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the