This proposed image for the fediverse is good; I like it a lot.

But I don't know that the combative language on this site is helpful. The Meta iconography isn't right, I agree, but there's something off about calling them “a large corporation that is joining in as late” (sic).

For one thing, Meta is early; for another, it seems to me that we want companies to participate? I don’t think seeking ideological purity is useful (and run the risks of the movement shooting itself in the foot).

Whatever you think about Meta’s goals for participating, I do also think Meta’s presence gives the network a sort of legitimacy that it was otherwise struggling to achieve. That’s a net benefit: we must grow the network.

I also agree with the point, made by Chris Messina, Manton Reece and others, that the right phrase is the social web, not the fediverse. The web is the network.