Meta’s upcoming ‘P92’ app is reported to have ActivityPub compatibility (link)

Many users and admins are opposed to federating with Meta, due to concerns including, but not limited to:

• user tracking, privacy violations, and data collection (link 1, 2, 3, 4)

• embrace-extend-extinguish behaviour (link)

• poor moderation

• corporate influence over the ActivityPub protocol

• centralization of the userbase around a single server

• psychological manipulation (link) of users via algorithm

• monopolistic behaviour (link)

• intentionally allowing (and profiting from!) anti-Black racism (link 1, 2)

• poor treatment of workers (link)

• facilitation of genocide on Facebook (link)

• failing to mitigate the distribution of CSAM on its platforms (link)

• New, June 16th allowing scams to proliferate on their platforms despite user attempts to file reports (link)

• New, June 16th rolling back COVID misinformation rules (link)

• New, July 1st putting the onus on parents/guardians to protect kids from online predators (link)

• a long history of breaching user trust (link)

In order to continue to build a new kind of social media, which prioritizes users over profits, and openness over walled gardens, we need to stand together in opposition to Meta’s digital colonization effort.

What’s making it difficult to form a consensus is that most admins haven’t been communicating with users about what they plan to do (let alone asking the users what they want).

So, one very easy thing we can do is ask our admins if they’re planning to block Meta, and if they aren’t, ask them to reconsider.