I've been meaning to comment on the Anti-Meta Fedi Pact, but @mako has worded the objections to it much better than I could have:
https://www.loomio.com/d/AZcJK6y2/discussion-support-the-anti-meta-fedi-pact/88
To add to this points, I want to encourage every supporting pre-emptive blocks to look at that from the POV of our relationships with people using fediverse servers owned by DataFarms, rather than our antipathy to their owners.
Our whole complaint about Meta et al has been that people are trapped in their DataFarms. Unable to connect with people on other services, and therefore unable to leave the server without losing all their connections there. If they finally start federating with the rest of the social web, and we block those servers, then it's *us* keeping those people trapped there. That seems like a terrible failure of solidarity.
@strypey sorry, how does connecting with other networks relate to moving services with connections intact?
#XMPP has #XEP, for servers to specify what features they support. Unless AP servers start enforcing that supported #FEP s be specified, you don't know that a new kid (bully?) on the block will both federate and support account portability (or when they stop supporting something).
@tetrislife
> how does connecting with other networks relate to moving services with connections intact?
You set up a new account on a different server. You can still find and interact with all the same people. ID portability would be even better, for sure, and full data portability better still. But we've never had either in the verse, and it hasn't stopped us celebrating how the freedom to change servers helps keep admins honest.