JustSomePerson

Because we are not censorship happy pieces of shit. We judge every statement for what it is, rather than applying guilt by association in three steps.

Most people who want to block Meta from the fediverse want to do it because they want to block people's opinions and statements from reaching them. They want the fediverse to be a "safe space" (a term which thankfully has lost most of its momentum in the last few years) where no dissenting or nuanced opinion is welcome. Somehow you're trying to turn Meta's similar behavior into an argument against them, even though it's an example of both organizations doing similar things (prohibiting unwanted opinions).

Everywhere else, red means stop and green means go. Here, the creator has chosen to reverse that to emphasize that they consider blocking to be good and allowing people to connect to be bad.

No attention is needed for the instances that are marked with red. They are federating.

What a fucking hateful choice of colours. Green for blocking and red for allowing communication. Really shows what kind of perspective the creator has.

If my broadcaster blocks the news segments they don't want me to see, it is. That's what's happening here. Instance owners are taking it upon themselves to block content from users. Bullying pieces of shit are trying to strong arm instance owners into defederating.

I'm sitting here with Windows 11, right now, dragging files back and forth into the folder tree, and into programs.

People are right about the address bar, though. That has been made much worse. The worst thing for me is how much gaps there are, so the leftmost part doesn't fit, and you can't tell which disk or share you're on.

makes trusting the company a non-factor
You just have to trust that the community stays on top of things

With your reasoning the latter point doesn't matter, since you believe no action should be taken when the community discovers things.

If they try to pull anything they would be caught the same way they were before.

They were caught. My problem is that you think being caught deceiving your end users should go unpunished. Betraying your customers in that way should mean the end of the product.

The fact that they do crypto shit is a general argument against them, that your arguments might counteract. The fact that they did SECRET crypto shit should be 100% nuclear.

We are aware of their involvement in crypto shit, and are therefore negative to them. Open source does not mean good (as in not evil), nor good (as in not bad).

Crypto scam scum

I am not incredibly smart, but I am smart enough to be aware of my own shortcomings. And those confirm this. I do often find myself supporting irrational positions because I don't want things to go the way that lots of awful people want it to. My desire for their cause to fail is stronger than my rational ability to analyze what would actually be best. That's how the human mind works.