Doesn’t the entire ”blocking” argument fall on the logical hurdle of ”blocking everyone who doesn’t block…” as that literally will be a never-ending and forever incomplete route to go. Shouldn’t white-listing be what they (kolektiva) actually are after? That they only allow a named appointed set of instances.
That will also, obviously, mean that unless they have some VERY dedicated community managers, they will only be whitelisting instances of certain sizes…this is clearly a case where centralization wins over decentralization; as an instance with 30k users require as much admin work as an instance-of-one. All the small instances will likely be shut out, simply due to the admin burden of adding them.
By that point it becomes worthwhile to do a re-take on if a whitelist-only Fediverse is the correct solution for those communities. I obviously don’t mean I personally do not want them here, I am talking about that the community leaders of such a community should perhaps reconsider if using a completely open protocol with absolutely no privacy built-in to it, to be the best safety barrier for privacy and to keep the dragons out.
It is a tricky thing to both be open and ”findable” whilst also locking everyone out by default unless they’ve proven themselves in some way, which is impossible unless manual action is taken in the first place.
I’m mostly thinking out loud, reflecting on the conundrum of both viewpoints, so I mean no offence this or that way.