@dansup I'm not comparing "apples" with "trees", I'm just saying that I do not trust nor like how Meta handle moderation.

I'm not even talking about proactive moderation (catching certain content before I see it) but the fact that even when you point them to something specific, they state that episodes of food challenges or clear doxing and offences do not violate their policy.

I've seen fediverse instances with almost zero resources to handle this content correctly.

@dansup if Meta is "too big" to handle moderation, maybe they should rethink the whole thing.

About your last point, I genuinely do not understand it (I may be missing some context or knowledge). Happy to answer if you can elaborate it a bit more. Thanks

@dansup @andreagrandi I think it's fair, yes. People keep saying stuff like this as if these platforms are just uwu smol bean fedi admins who were trying to run chill little communities when suddenly billions of users signed up overnight and now they're doing their best to moderate it all but really struggling to find the time what with work and childcare. They're not, they're groups of grown adults who sat around a conference table one day and deliberately chose to allow libsoftiktok to stay on their platforms because they'd make very slightly more money that way and that's more important to them than keeping vulnerable people safe. If your goals for fedi are anything more noble than "make network big" then surely Meta are almost by definition your enemy?