@dansup Thanks for clarifying. I definitely do remember you creating a list on FediDb.org of all the servers that had signed the FediPact, and pixelfed.social being one of the biggest servers on that list. The pact says, "i hereby agree to block any instances owned by meta should they pop up on the fediverse." https://fedipact.online/
So this is a change of position, and one I personally don't agree with, but that is your prerogative. @nathanu
@nathanu I'm not sure I'm gonna go that far, but I am disappointed, and would appreciate some transparency as to what changed @dansup's mind, and if there's a possibility of reconsidering based on Facebook's lax moderation practices toward bigoted content.
@rysiek I wonder why this paints such a rosier picture than the graphs on https://fedidb.org. Not just >double the peak, but a totally different trend. Cc: @dansup
@nasser it would be interesting to see a version of that license written by an actual lawyer.
I don't agree with the FSF's ideological objection, but that "license" looks like someone with no law knowledge typed a list of things they like into Notepad. Almost certainly either unenforceable as written, could be weaponized against good-faith uses that are in the spirit of the license, or both
In the meantime I'd put more faith in the hybrid of AGPL + worker organizing