I saw a very strange take.
Someone wrote a literal hit piece about the fediverse, cherry-picking posts from *January*, using unreliable algorithms, and still making the fediverse look, in practical terms, clear of actual child porn (even where there might be a problem).
But, then, they were like...
Defederation is a blunt instrument. If an instance has something you believe to be real child porn, and they don't take it down, we shouldn't be in the business of blocking instances, we should just block that one post.
???
While defederation is a blunt instrument, and it is probably used by some instances far too much for reasons unrelated to that, it's kind of rich for someone to smear mud onto someone, then to ask them to make themselves even more vulnerable to having mud smeared on them.
*in practical terms
Searching the fediverse and finding a tiny number of hits. Ugh.
If he loves Elon or Mark so much, he can go use Facebook or Twitter... Sheesh.
If he thinks he has some incident to escalate, and I really don't trust him at all, he is sus af, he can escalate that.
He probably just wants more material to write about.
He probably loves Facebook (and Big Tech) as it's an endless spring of material that he can mine, complain about, to, and philosophize about.
Also, there is a whole lot of arguing / talking with a committee about some little minutia.
It's not as simple as "okay, so if someone deliberately runs a real child porn node, we will cut them off".
This guy is also fond of the idea of having "Facebook run the place", as if people couldn't get away from Facebook fast enough, and as if that was ever a realistic goal (given that the whole point is decentralization...).