It absolutely isn’t, which was my point. You can’t have a club that doesn’t suck if you don’t exclude people on the grounds of sucking. And it’s not a question of merely setting and policing rules; I’m talking about subjective, “because I said so” choices. On the hypothetical good version of Facebook, someone would simply be able to say “I’m deleting Infowars because I think it’s bad”. That’s not an outlandish thing to suggest.
I doubt Facebook itself could make that transition and live, but then, I doubt Facebook will still be here in ten years whatever happens. If we want its successors to be less horrible, we should be thinking about what was wrong with it from the start, not how to clone its septic final stage (which is the problem I have with Mastodon and most similar efforts) (arguably Mastodon is more a clone of Twitter, but the same argument applies).
