Crossposted this in case of takedown. Hope this isn’t breaking the rules.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/1370464

Original Title: At least one lemmy.world admin accepted an off the record meeting with meta, and they won’t tell you about it.

Edit: I cannot confirm if the Original OP is telling the truth or lying, figured I wanted more people to see this so you can decide for yourselves who to believe.

Edit 2: Archived Link: https://archive.is/aJrnU

Edit 3: Hmm… Interesting… The original post was taken down instead of admins making a response. I mean, if I were an admin with nothing to hide, I’d just simply say “I did not have a secret meeting with anyone representing Meta/Facebook” then maybe lock the thread if stuff gets too out of hand. Deleting a post is not the right thing to do, and even if you are innocent, now you just made yourself look bad.

Edit 4: I appreciate the fact that the mods elected to use the lock thread option instead of outright removing this post. I do not agree with your decision, but I respect the fact that you left this post up. Alright, so that’s the end of this, hopefully the next time someone make accusations, they provide evidence. Also, if you are making a legitimate accusation, make sure to crosspost to different instances to make takedowns more difficult. So to conclude this, I want to state these facts:

  1. The Original OP did not seem to have provided any evidence.

  2. The Original Post was removed and the Original OP was banned from the community which the post was in.

  3. None of the admins of lemmy.world made a statement in response to the accusations.

You can draw whatever conclusion you want from this. But without any further information, this discussion cannot continue any longer, since a mod has already locked this post.

Archive Link of where the page was, now showing an error message: https://archive.is/5BWIw

Don’t belive me? Ask them.

Fosstodon admins were at least transparent and shared with their community when they were approached by meta for an off the record meeting, which was awesome. They also declined that meeting and shared screenshots of them doing so.

But lemmy.world admins won’t tell you that at least one of them accepted that same meeting request. Why won’t they say that?

Tell your community that you accepted a meeting with meta. Thats not wrong in and of itself, but I feel it is shady/not right when you’re communicating about a wait-and-see approach, while having meetings with the company in question yet not being transparent about it.

@ruud@lemmy.world care to comment?

Also, I’m spinning up my own instance because I don’t trust this platform to folks who aren’t transparent. Don’t ask me to join, it’s going to be just for me for now. I don’t even know that I have time to admin an instance, but my trust is wearing thin based on the facts at hand. So, it’s what I’m doing.

  • Rhoeri@lemmy.mlEnglish
    403·
    2 years ago

    What a ridiculous attempt at stirring a pot. Not only is it someone saying something that cannot be proven, but someone quoting someone saying something that cannot be proven….

    What if I were to spread it around that this is all a ploy from Reddit to fuck with the lemmy community and cause drama?

    Embarrassing.

    • trouser_mouse@lemmy.worldEnglish
      6·
      2 years ago

      People using an instance that appears to try to act and communicate transparently and asks for donations from the community to run the platform, should actually be transparent in my opinion.

      People can just go somewhere else, and no one is obligated to say or do anything, but users appear to value transparency, and I feel as a collective we should value open and honest discussion about issues like this rather than shutting it down or being confrontational or argumentative or rude about it.

      It might be nothing, it might be something: either way, people are entitled to feel they deserve to be kept informed. Whether they are entitled to or not is a different kettle of fish.

    • nekat_emanresu@lemmy.mlEnglish
      75·
      2 years ago

      OP is asking for confirmation in an announcement - Copy pasting from my comment here

      All that matters about the OPs claim is that the admins need to say they aren’t contracted with meta, but they haven’t, which is damning evidence that they have signed at least one contract with Meta.

      It’s simple logic.

      1. Lies or truths about an NDA silenced meeting with Mastodon admins.
      2. Extrapolating that idea that an NDA may exist or have been signed onto all instance admins
      3. Asking for a statement from the admins proving that there are no NDAs in place with Meta by the lemmy.world admins

      Then reliable absolute silence about being contracted or not with Meta.

      • Rhoeri@lemmy.mlEnglish
        82·
        2 years ago

        So if they don’t say they didn’t when asked if they did, then ipso facto, they did?

        I don’t think you or anyone gets to make that distinction. And the fact that you think you can, illustrates how this is an attempt at creating drama.

        How about this:

        Maybe it’s a dumb fucking question that they don’t feel obligated to answer? I mean, I would imagine that it’s damn near insulting to them to feel they have any reason to answer such a stupid and irrelevant question as it’s not up to you how they manage their instance.

        So yea. It’s purposefully stirring a pot. So stop.

        • nekat_emanresu@lemmy.mlEnglish
          54·
          2 years ago

          The OP seemed desperate for confirmation before he felt compelled to leave. He was talking rationally in his post.

          If you have an entire secret meeting that’s NDA enforced, then you literally cannot speak about the existence or your participation in it legally.

          As a server admin, he should really be on top of stuff like this. It’d be a fairly quick thing to mention, and the fact that he didn’t means he likely signed an NDA. He doesn’t NEED to prove it, but everyone should turn their backs on him for not CHOOSING to prove it(because he likely cannot legally).

          Many people came here to escape exactly what is now happening. There will obviously be passionate people venting or trying to understand this. The people that are on your side though, tend to fight dirty and say invalid things. Meta is evil, i don’t want to be near it, a contract with meta starts the death of a thousand cuts, and people wont remember what we are saying when they finally leave.

          Meta is stirring the pot, the admins are. If i just knew they stood against what the average FOSS server stands for in their FAQ or something I would have never gone there, and neither would the people complaining. I can’t stress just how bad this is, but most people don’t know the deeper political/corporate side of this.

          I’m not starting convos about this anymore, just replying to other comments and the likes. I’d rather we get some basic transparency from the admins nearby, but I already left over it because of it.

          • Rhoeri@lemmy.mlEnglish
            45·
            2 years ago

            It’s absolutely stirring a pot and its in bad faith. But I’m not creating posts all over and cross posting nonsense because of it.

            It’s none of anyone’s fucking business what they do with their instance. None. Period. Done.

            Dude said he denied a meeting. I believe him. If someone else didn’t- I don’t fucking care. And I think the fact that this matters so much to you should be a clear indication that you need a hobby. It’s a social media site. Nothing more.

            Stop taking this shit so seriously.

            • nekat_emanresu@lemmy.mlEnglish
              42·
              2 years ago

              You are the one acting in bad faith and i suspect you don’t actually know what that means. I’m not denying that I’m also stirring the pot.

              You are correct that its up to their admins, I would just prefer a bit of a mission statement making it more obvious they have corporate ambitions.

              Dude said he denied a meeting. I believe him. If someone else didn’t- I don’t fucking care. And I think the fact that this matters so much to you should be a clear indication that you need a hobby. It’s a social media site. Nothing more.

              When did he deny? I haven’t been checking other posts lately. Link please

              I’m done with replying in this post, If you don’t give a link then you are the one acting in bad faith.

  • Kalkaline @lemmy.oneEnglish
    19·
    2 years ago

    The answer to this scenario built into the fediverse. You bail on the bad instance and move to a new one. If the problem of profile transfers can be solved, then the whole thing becomes fairly trivial.

  • handhookcardoor@lemmy.worldEnglish
    176·
    2 years ago

    Can we please shut up about Meta, there’s not a single point in the conversation, everyone has made up their mind, and now are spreading stupid school rumors, like, what the fuck y’all.

    • nekat_emanresu@lemmy.mlEnglish
      46·
      2 years ago

      If you don’t like pizza, don’t go into a pizza shop and tell them to shut up about pizza? You coulda downvoted and moved on.

      • handhookcardoor@lemmy.worldEnglish
        61·
        2 years ago

        No, but if I go to a site that I enjoy, and I see people constantly bitching and complaining about a single issue that we’ve all been over already, and I think maybe it’s enough?

        We can make better content than this.

        • nekat_emanresu@lemmy.mlEnglish
          21·
          2 years ago

          There are honorable easy to talk about complaints, and there are dishonorable annoying people that can’t be reasoned with. The issue would be resolved in a minute if both parties were civil. This is an existential threat for lemmy.

      • Rhoeri@lemmy.mlEnglish
        42·
        2 years ago

        Such a horrible analogy. How about-

        If you LIKE pizza, and don’t like people making up bullshit unprovable stories about it- they should be sent packing.

        This is a bullshit story without any substance or merit. It should be dismissed, and those staring the bullshit should be called out.

      • Anoril@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        2·
        2 years ago

        Strange. I remember someone advertised lemmy to me as reddit alternative. Turns out, its place for circlejerk and being afraid of facebook.

            • nekat_emanresu@lemmy.mlEnglish
              22·
              2 years ago

              It’d be sweet if people learned more and talked less, then they would have realised the nazis bad, and the end of the world wont happen because of that silly prediction.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Facebook

              https://www.abc.net.au/religion/facebook-complicity-in-the-rohingya-genocide/13737882

              I haven’t fully verified those two, but they give a hint. If you’d like to stop assuming and start understanding why some people are deeply worried then you can try and learn.

              • Anoril@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                22·
                2 years ago

                Dont worry. Its entertaining enough for me that people were hyping lemmy and fediverse so much, and it turns out its all gonna crumble on itself the moment anyone big will join the hype lol. Makes it seem like it forever will be obscure place at the corner of the internet with decade old memes and circlejerk how good it is that nobody knows about them.

                Dont worry, i know that facebook is shit. Allthough your second link is bullshit too, considering that it boils to “how dares facebook not being more initiative to censor itself”. Itsjob of tge government to enforce censorshipon facebook, not the other way around. Still, most criticism is focussed around privacy and if people are afraid for their data, they shouldnt post it on public forums in the first place.

                Wonder whats next gonna be the danger for fediverse? Maybe lemmy.world getting too big? As you see maybe you already cant trust people who run it, maybe instances should defederate from it while its not too late?

  • chickenwing@lemmy.mlEnglish
    6·
    2 years ago

    Doubt threads will even use activitypub. Tumblr said it was going to months ago. Never happened.

  • Retronautickz@beehaw.orgEnglish
    4·
    2 years ago

    For what I understand Meta only reached Mastodon/Misskey/Pleroma and PixelFed instance admins. There hasn’t been mention of they even reaching Friendica/socialhome/hubzilla admins. So I doubt they even care contacting admins from “non-competing” software based servers

    Also, I don’t think the NDA stops admins from disclosing they were contacted by Meta. It only stops them to talk about what’s been discussed on these reunions, because several tech bros at mastodon where prouly announcing they were “invited by Meta to a talk about the future of the Fediverse” and how they accepted. So the admins of Lemmy World deciding not to confirm or deny doesn’t necessarily prove they signed anything.

    • 001100 010010@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPEnglish
      4·
      2 years ago

      Typically yes, but in this case, there is no modlog for the reason of removal since the logs got purged by the admins. They forgot to delete the other log which says the user was banned and reason being “Misinformation”

      There a modlog button at the bottom of the page, you can see for yourself, but they might’ve be deleted by now.

      Edit: Apparantly, the user was only banned from the community, his account is still not banned.

      • tenth@lemmy.mlEnglish
        3·
        2 years ago

        Wow they banned the OP of that post 3 years from that community for misinformation. Do they have proof that it is misinformation?

        Banned

        @booty_flexx from the community Fediverse reason: Misinformation expires: in 3 years

        I could not find that post being removed from modlog. There were other removed posts but not that particular one

        Whats the point of modlog if it does not record everything for auditing purpose?

  • Sean Tilley@lemmy.mlMEnglish
    2·
    2 years ago

    After extensive review of the conversation, I believe that it has run its course, and has degraded beyond any fruitful discussion. We need a cooldown.

    I will say this on the matter: making an accusation against someone for not saying something is not, in fact, proof of complicity. You cannot prove a negative that way, and Russell’s Teapot would suggest the burden of proof is on you, the one making the accusation. Otherwise, this is just Glenn Beck-style “Why do you think they’re saying anything? I’m just asking questions” discourse, which is disingenuous.

    Thread Locked.