Defederate. Facebook is an existential threat to the fediverse as a concept and in reality.

I would recommend defederation. Meta has a long history of malicious information manipulation and helping drive the rot of the www.

Beyond that, they boast a user count that is an order of magnitude greater than the entire fediverse. This sounds, like a recipe for mods burning out from trying to keep the firehose of bad actors under control. Not to mention the potential server impact of caching posts, images, etc.

I’m very much drawn to the idea that users individually make the choice, but I don’t think openly embracing Threads is a good idea.

I’d much rather prefer a Fediverse without Threads than Threads without a Fediverse.

Erin Kissane has an excellent article on why Meta doesn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt. Meta/Facebook has had power over social media before and displayed incredible disregard for human life, much less anything else related to healthy communities.

To treat Threads the same as a brand new instance and federate with it is a mistake.

I’d say wait to see what happens. It’s possible it won’t even be able to federate with Lemmy, like with Mastodon, only having partial federation.

I’d rather not defederate. Why? Because the fediverse is open by default and so far we haven’t really limit-tested that philosophy. In my opinion, it is better to push the envelope sooner rather than later, if only so that we can learn from the experience.

If it doesn’t work out, then so be it. We have the tools to fight back against culture-death – this will not be Eternal September 2.0

I choose sdf because it has typically been neutral on those regards. Let users choose whether they want to block whole instances or not. Federation is literally the word that gives meaning to fediverse, I don’t agree with the arguments who want to make the fediverse an “alternative” internet isolated from the rest.