Let’s stick to one topic for now.
If lemmy was as popular as Facebook then exactly the same thing would have happened. Lemmy is designed not to have the top down control which the article says Facebook should have used to hide posts.
You can’t blame Facebook for something if you support an alternative where it wouldn’t even be possible to avoid that thing.
If you’re willing to acknowledge that we can move on and you can try and say in simple terms what you think meta did to obstruct the ICC, try to be accurate and concise.
It’s funny to me how many big flare-ups and popular issues have been about defederating or controlling other instances but we’ve not really had a single popular event where users work on anything together to benefit community.
Individuals have made tools but there’s not been calls to action and mass cooperation events for anything beside silencing unpopular groups. No community design discussions devising and implementing tools or features, no group efforts to catalog or document or display useful data…
I don’t know if it’s just that people here haven’t considered the possibility of doing something positive or that outrage about others is just so much more compelling
The thing is your article blames meta for not doing something that would be impossible on lemmy by design. Meta didn’t act to silence messages calling for violence but there is no mechanism to do this top down on lemmy only by defederating instances or individual communities/instance admin banning posts. Exactly the same thing could happen here, if the user base ever got large enough.
That’s the same thing with a different label.