• inventa@lemmy.fmhy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 year ago

    But that is an issue too. Why would other instances allow them full access while being prevented from collaborating in theirs ?

    • socialjusticewizard
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not really keen on their reasons for defederating, but this makes no sense to me. What do I care if a beehaw user is posting good content on my community but I can’t go to their instance? It’s still more content and engagement for my community.

        • TiredSpider
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          problem is you don’t have to start slinging slurs to troll people. People can still be nuisances and say bigoted things.

      • inventa@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I see your point. I was seeing it from the perspective of discouraging stuff to be shared on other communities because it’s already in beehaw, but you’d need an account to participate there.

        But I see what you say, allowing them to contribute to other instances isn’t bad even if they don’t allow those instances to contribute on theirs.

    • Faceman🇦🇺@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s each instances choice to make I guess, and it’s part of the freedom of the platform.

      beehaw would be within their rights to do it (effectively going read only to the outside, not currently possible but a requested feature is to have private or invite only communities), and if they are intending to be the clean family friendly option, it would be a valid choice to make if it were possible.