I don’t think it makes it unworkable, but I think it warrants a democratic process in this kind of decision making.
Without something to enforce that Democratic process, and with no incentive for instance hosts to commit to it, it’s unworkable.
The issue with the whole platform, from the get go, has always been that without a central authority to hold it together, each instance is inevitably going do whatever it wants. The technology for Lemmy does not inherently solve the social issue. Defederation, as a concept, is antithetical to the ideal of the platform. But it’s also necessary to keep it managed.
I think a new solution needs to be proposed. Like…I don’t know, floating communities or something. Communities that are not tied to any instance.
solrize@lemmy.world 1 year ago
But an instance is someone’s ball the server, the domain name, the admin credentials, etc. We are guests here, including community mods. And the server admins as you say are volunteers. They shouldn’t have to put up with bullshit just to please us. So any topic community like politics that generates disagreement will be precarious.
Starting a new instance isn’t the answer because of siloing and network effects. So we need more of a peer to peer model than a federation of servers. Or anyway, put the federating onto the client side. I made another post about that earlier.
CaptObvious@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Isn’t federation already a form of peer-to-peer networking? And while I agree that clients need the ability to block entire instances, spinning up your own server is already a way to do that.