(Apparently) Unpopular Opinion: I think defederating Threads is the wrong move, because it just locks people into Threads. If people on Twitter had the ability to move to Mastodon AND still interact with all the people they did before, I think we would have seen even more people move. The only reason I still check twitter at all is because I have a few close friends who didn’t move. Meta is likely going to have big adoption of people who aren’t ready to go to Mastodon, but are interested in getting out of the dumpster-on-fire that twitter seems to continue to be. But blocking those people from being able to join the more popular Lemmy instances, given no actual policy violations, just will keep people in Meta that otherwise could leave. With the “however” being: It’s not quite clear to me that Threads users will be interacting with Lemmy as much Mastodon, if Threads were a Reddit replacement, it’s more directly connected.
I understand your viewpoint but you have to realize meta/Facebook has done this before. The best solution to protect Lemmy/mastodon in the long run is to cut the cancer out before it has a chance dm to spread.
When you cut off a cancer, it dies. When you defederate a social network orders of magnitude larger and more powerful than you… it doesn’t even notice and continues to thrive. It’s not the same thing at all.

No, there are conciquences, we are at a point where its hard to see them

We take a risk no matter what we do, when we pull that plug both FB and us loose control of eachother,

FB will likely try to Embrace Extend Extinguish

at the same time we do somthing with our end of the link (3E method but without coersion like they will) or we die.

OR we cut them off

we sever the link and both sides lose power, Huge company with propaganda factories vs Good will and word of mouth alone,

FB could also force federate by webscraping (likely read only)