This is basically history repeating itself again with the Beehaw defederation.
I’ve been around the fediverse longer than the age of my account would suggest, but I missed the drama around Beehaw - what was the story there?
Comment on Me too! Or not? Whichever!
Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net 19 hours agoMan, I agree with your comment you left there; he needs to get over himself.
While I didn’t read his whole rant, I read a good bit of it. He does have a point, in that he’s not obliged to accommodate users, and nor are we obliged to use his client.
This is basically history repeating itself again with the Beehaw defederation. Fitting with the motifs associated with history repeating itself, the repeat is a temu knock off of the original.
In both cases it seems pretty immature, at least in approach, but structure isn’t necessarily bad and it’s a big ocean.
orlyowl@piefed.ca 17 hours ago
Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net 16 hours ago
Beehaw is by approval only for accounts. They’re really clear about this, but they also went through a huge defederation with a lot of big instances.
OwOarchist@pawb.social 18 hours ago
He might not be obligated to “accommodate” users, but I’d argue he is obligated to inform users.
If he’d made the blocklist public and an acknowledged ‘feature’ of his frontend from the beginning, then sure. Everything would be fine. Some users might want to use it without the blocklist, but he’s not obliged to provide that for them.
Making the blocklist secret, though, is deceptive, manipulative, and underhanded. And it goes against the entire ethos of both open source and the fediverse.