I don't normally Boost screenshots of posts from other networks with no links, but this one is just so sharply observed and casually noted, I couldn't help myself : )
(1/?)
I had to spend some time thinking about this. You raise 2 points, which I'll address in reverse order.
@SimonCHulse
> I'm glad that ... someone did share this lovely nugget over there with us
I agree, which is why I Boosted it. But a link to the original would have been appreciated, for purposes like attribution/ proof-of-origin (ie not #MOLE slop). Unless Threats posts don't have URLs, which would be good to know.
(2/?)
@SimonCHulse
> I’m glad that threads isn’t linked to mastodon
I must get around to finishing the blog post summing up my thoughts on this, as it comes up a lot.
Basically, I think open federation is a net good, even when it includes services run by known DataFarmers. They can easily set up a fediverse service using vanilla Mastodon without telling us, so we need to protect privacy with the structure of the protocols we use to federate. Not knee-jerk antipathy to this or that service.
(3/3)
Threats offers limited per-account federation over AP, and some Mastodon services federate with accounts that turn it on. AFAIK our one does. I think that's a net good too.
For better or for worse, some people have their post-Titter social presence on Threats. Refusing to federate with it just keeps them stuck in the same collective action problem affecting anyone on a Walled Garden. Federating with it enables them to leave, without waiting for everyone they talk to there to leave too.
