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.

  • 14th_cylon@lemm.eeEnglish
    25·
    1 year ago

    So we wouldn’t honestly be allowed to know legally without getting that admin in trouble.

    i have no idea whether any of the speculations are true or not, but purely theoretically, this is really lame excuse. if you are representing open source community, you shouldn’t be taking meetings where you have to sign nda.

    • Alethe Crow@lemm.eeEnglish
      28·
      1 year ago

      Oh 100% agreed. It makes the NDA’s that have already occurred with all this even more sketchy.

      My personal guess is that these NDA’s are because of one of two reasons.

      Threads/Facebook talks about their specific proprietary software and how it functions etc.

      Threads/Facebook is offering money for access/federation to instances.

      It is entirely possible it’s also both at once thinking about it.

      I dislike Facebook with a passion along with Google. However as much as I dislike Facebook, proper discussion and information is essential. Without these things people tend to panic and assume worst case scenarios.

      People seem to have forgotten one of Zuckerbergs quotes.

      “ Zuck: People just submitted it. Zuck: I don’t know why. Zuck: They “trust me” Zuck: Dumb fucks”

      This was during the time he first released Facebook. It’s part of a chat transcript that was released and verified.

      Also during 2008 the FTC quoted Zuckerbergs own word at him during a trial.

      “It’s better to buy than to compete”

      This was from an email Zuckerberg sent earlier that year during the WhatsApp acquisition or near it.

      These two quote should tell everyone exactly what to expect from this company and person. Considering how their track record is atrocious.

      • nekat_emanresu@lemmy.mlEnglish
        7·
        1 year ago

        It gives them a secret way to start deeper negotiations. Pretty much this is the end of any openness and community focus the instance has. The contents don’t matter as much as the symbolism of having participated. I’ll ask you Alethecrow, how many millions would it take you to agree to working for them and pretending to be working only for yourself?

    • nekat_emanresu@lemmy.mlEnglish
      14·
      1 year ago

      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. Followed of course by mass downvotes when it makes no sense to do so.

      See all the bots saying the same silly responses over and over about no evidence, then massively downvoting people who are clearly rational.