Dear server admins, please defederate threads.net. Dear users, ask your server admin to defederate threads.net.

My Password Is 1234@lemmy.world to Fediverse@lemmy.world – 959 points –
mstdn.social

Meta just announced that they are trying to integrate Threads with ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, etc.). We need to defederate them if we want to avoid them pushing their crap into fediverse.

If you're a server admin, please defederate Meta's domain "threads.net"

If you don't run your own server, please ask your server admin to defederate "threads.net".

817

You are viewing a single comment

I'm not comfortable with assuming the dregs of Facebook will leave Lemmy alone. I'll stick to instances that have defederated and I'll actively block instances that don't.

I'm not out here trying to stop you from being on federated instances or anyone else. But I will not personally support instances that allow that monster into the ecosystem.

You know that if you actively blocked the instances that are federated with Threads you wouldn't have seen this post, right (lemmy.world/instances)? I'm also only active on instances that block Threads, but blocking those who don't is an excessive measure.

Like I said, I don't care what others do. But for me the correct answer is to not interact with users from that platform.

When I start seeing threads users in .world lemmy comment sections I will block .world.

That's not how federation works. If you're on an instance that doesn't allow Threads, you won't see them at all, even when viewing posts coming from other instances.

I am given to understand that I will still see the comments from threads users on lemmy. Just not the posts from threads.

You're confusing defederation with Lemmy's instance blocking. Defederation means that none of a server's content is federated. Lemmy's new instance blocking feature, however, only blocks communities and not users.

I don't think I was confusing the defed from blocking, I was confused about what you meant. Thanks for the clarification.