Discussion: Support the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact
For some time, there have been rumors that Meta (Facebook) has plans to impose itself on the Fediverse. These rumors have recently been confirmed, with the news that Meta is developing a clone of Mastodon, referred to as "Project 92", "Barcelona", or "Threads", and that it has had a meeting with the administrators of several large Mastodon instances, possibly including Eugen Rochko, while silencing them with a non-disclosure agreement.
Meta is an oligopoly that has aggressively sought to control social media, through absorption of other social media companies, and through policies of "embrace, extend, and extinguish", as with the RSS and XMPP protocols. Meta, through Facebook, is infamous for condoning the spread of far right ideology and of dangerous misinformation.
I see our best hope in collective resistance.
Therefore, I would like us to discuss whether we should support this move, and if so, how best to do so. As a starting point for discussion, I suggest the following:
Social.Coop commits to blocking any Fediverse instances that Meta creates.
We, as a body, sign the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact.
We follow up by collectively drafting and issuing a public statement.
(As I have not been active in Social.Coop discussions, I hope that the way I am presenting this is appropriate, and I welcome constructive criticism.)
Poll Created Mon 19 Jun 2023 8:52PM
Shall Social.Coop sign the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact and commit to blocking Meta instances on the Fediverse? Closed Thu 22 Jun 2023 8:00PM
I apologize for the delay in reporting the outcome of the sence check on signing the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact and committing to blocking Meta instances.
51% voted "Looks good", which is a majority, but just barely. 30% voted "Concerned", 17%, "Not sure yet", and 1% "Undecided". Given that it was such a narrow majority, I would have to say that the course of action I suggested is not sufficiently direct a representation of our collective views on the issue. However, the discussion shows that there is a general concern with Meta, and while there is a range of views on how best to respond, there does seem to be a general sense that we should have a collective response. We are continuing to discuss next steps. Suggestions have included issuing a statement on the matter, possibly using statements from other instances as models, and the possibility of calling for some sort of Assembly of Fediverse instances, using the issue of Meta (and perhaps the Pact) as a starting point for broader organization.
|Results||Option||% of points||Voters|
|Not sure yet||17.6%||12|
68 of 69 people have participated (98%)
Mon 19 Jun 2023 10:44PM
I wonder if we should have a discussion about this first before jumping straight to a poll? This is a confusing aspect of Loomio that I think most of us do at some point. That said, I support this.
Mon 19 Jun 2023 10:51PM
I would strongly prefer there to be a democratic coalition of instances that collectively makes decisions, like this, that have wider impacts across the entire network, rather than individual instances making this decision on their own.
I would rather we work to set standard practice policies that all federated instances follow and then ask that Meta follow them, rather than preemptively block them. I don't like them, but it's not a great way to go imo.