ruffsl@programming.dev to Fediverse@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agoSecond largest Lemmy instance preemptively un-friends Facebooklemmy.mlexternal-linkmessage-square939fedilinkarrow-up13.51Karrow-down154file-text
arrow-up13.46Karrow-down1external-linkSecond largest Lemmy instance preemptively un-friends Facebooklemmy.mlruffsl@programming.dev to Fediverse@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square939fedilinkfile-text
minus-squarekenbw2@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2arrow-down11·1 year ago As for how they will could suck users away Meta have stated no such plans. I understand the distrust, I’m hesitant myself. But let’s not spread inaccurate statements
minus-squareAzzu@lemm.eelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up21·1 year agoThere should be no benefit of the doubt with Facebook. They’ve proven time and time again how shitty they are. If you let your shitty “friend” exploit you for the 100th time the friend is the problem, but you are also responsible because you keep letting them.
minus-squarereddwarf@vlemmy.netcakelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·1 year agoYes, the reasonable stance. Because that worked every time, all the time with commercial entities.
Meta have stated no such plans. I understand the distrust, I’m hesitant myself. But let’s not spread inaccurate statements
There should be no benefit of the doubt with Facebook. They’ve proven time and time again how shitty they are.
If you let your shitty “friend” exploit you for the 100th time the friend is the problem, but you are also responsible because you keep letting them.
Yes, the reasonable stance. Because that worked every time, all the time with commercial entities.