Personally, I think it's quite unfair for them to federate all our posts and comments, and make their platform appear busy, while they don't allow federation of their own content, and they don't allow self-hosting either.

If we imagine what could happen in the future

• As they are on ProductHunt, they manage to raise a few millions, hire devs, develop every feature you can think about under the sun
• Fediverse users move massively to ClubsAll to enjoy the new features, Redditors move too because it's better than Reddit
• Over time, due to those new features and other "technical reasons",, federation with Lemmy and others becomes clunky, or completely stops
• Meta / Google / Reddit buys ClubsAll and start to look how to extract a profit from the large userbase, enshittifies the mobile app, the web interface, etc.

Seems to bring us back to the current Reddit situation with extra steps.

I dont like the idea of defederation from a free speach perspective. But ive said this before and ill say it again. One direction federation is not federation it is theft.

Surly we can establiah a federation policy (across as many instances as nessasary) with the following:

1. No federating content to or from any other instance in a single direction.
2. No federating sponsored or paid content that is not marked as sponsored in both human and machine readable format.
3. No federating with any instance that does not follow these rules.
4. No using content if these rules are not complied with

I think we need to establish these 4 as the prerequisite of a continued open and free fediverse.

Hi everyone, I’m Vinay, the founder of ClubsAll. I’m happy to answer any questions and would like to address where I think ClubsAll might be misunderstood.

“I think it’s unfair for them to federate all our posts and comments, making their platform seem busy, while they don’t allow federation of their own content or self-hosting.”

I completely agree with this concern. However, it’s important to note that ClubsAll is still in its infancy. We currently have around 10 upvotes on Product Hunt, with a nearly non-existent active user base or content. So even if we implement federation, the activity level would be minimal for now.

“We could establish a federation policy across instances, ensuring no single-direction federation of content.”

This proposal seems fair. I’d like to suggest an additional condition: “No single-direction federation of content once an instance reaches a certain level of activity, say, X posts per day.”
The reasoning here is that new and small instances like ClubsAll need time to grow and develop their features before being subjected to such rules. This approach ensures that very young instances aren’t immediately blocked, especially when they might not have much content anyway.

There’s also been talk about defederation. I want to be transparent – ClubsAll is bootstrapped and we have invested a lot of money and sweat to help the community. Right now even my developer has moved on, so new development has halted. This is why I was forced to launch.

If the community chooses to turn against ClubsAll, it won’t survive. That said, I’ll leave the decision to you. Defederation would immediately kill it. If defederation is the path chosen, then so be it.

Unless their users can interact here it's going to be dead there

I think I might start adding a suffix to my posts

If you are reading this on CurbsAll, it was stolen from Lemmy.