• @PatMustard
    link
    English
    34 months ago

    That’s unfortunately not how it works at all, it’s an block-list model rather than an allow-list

    • Call me Lenny/Leni
      link
      fedilink
      English
      24 months ago

      Unless I misunderstand something, that sounds like it would defeat one of the core purposes of a fediverse. If there is no membership coordination, it at least seems like it would be less a council and more like what it would be if it was just a group of sites with a common goal.

      Are people downvoting what I was saying because they think I was asserting a statement of fact or because they disagree with that being how it should work (or because I used Scientology in my example)? Cue the line “this is why we can’t have nice things”.

      • @PatMustard
        link
        English
        24 months ago

        The fediverse isn’t any kind of council, it’s just sites which use the same protocol to put their information in a form they all understand. It is open by default.

        • Call me Lenny/Leni
          link
          fedilink
          English
          14 months ago

          There are implications to the protocol though, for example you and I can communicate despite being registered to different parts of the fediverse. The lack of any safeguards against a group being unruly in ways that affect the rest of the fediverse (Lemmygrad comes to mind) seems like something that would backfire, kind of like if I was queen of a territory but then joined the US as a state and then proceeded to send people to the three branches of government just to troll the system. But there are safeguards against that, just not on Lemmy.

          • @PatMustard
            link
            English
            24 months ago

            The safeguard is defederating from that rogue instance