In theory. The censorship i've noticed on the fediverse is INSANE. Entire instances (Usually conservative ones) getting banned just because they get the automatic label of "Racist, Homophobe, etc" even though that is not what happening in most of them. (There are some horrible instances, not denying they don't exist).

I'm in the middle of (and searching recent Mastodon discussions on HN because someone had made some good points about surveillance / privacy aspects that I'm trying to track down) a discussion with my instance admin over a block ("silencing") of another instance as that instance hosts a few accounts of US CISA staff.

The conflict between safe space / security and highly-visible but effectively pointless gestures is ... significant.

I'll also note that I've known my admin for many years (across a few social networks, with many interactions), and generally highly regard her take and approach on matters. This is not a trivial question, though I feel she's come down on the wrong side.

Limits it to the owners of the instances, who are just as (more) vulnerable to pressure from cancel campaigns.

Remember when Gab tried to join the fediverse? A bunch of instance owners got together and agreed to betray the entire premise of the fediverse by blacklisting Gab.

[bla bla bla, i don't support gab, and all other disclaimers]