Your insistence on believing there is a single bsky.social instance is commendable, for sure

Multiple people have explained to you over time how there is no singular bsky.social instance (as they have an entirely different technical model) and how blocking the server is less effective than deplatforming the user.

Because again, account moves are more powerful on Bluesky than they are on fedi.

Maybe you should do just a bit more research into how ATProto works

Well to answer that we must first look at how bsky.social is just the auto-assigned domains for new users

the underlying servers are all hosted at subdomains of .bsky.network, luckily mary-ext / mary.my.id has a neat lil' GitHub repo that collects them all in one place: https://github.com/mary-ext/atproto-scraping?tab=readme-ov-file#bluesky-hosted-servers

Now if we wanna specifically exclude content from the PDS that JD Vance is on, all I'd have to do is look up which one of these PDS instances vance's account is, nuke it from our database and stop ingesting content from that PDS through the firehose

For reference, we can use https://pdsls.dev to look up JD's server and determine it to be https://woodear.us-west.host.bsky.network/

problem is, unlike how fedi tends to work, the underlying PDS instances are assigned automatically; Vance didn't choose that PDS, it was chosen for him. As such straight up blocking this PDS from being indexed has about the same impact as blocking a large Mastodon instance like mastodon.social or something along those lines would have: We would hit lots of people that have nothing to do with vance, or are even actively blocking and shaming him

Now you are right in the observation that Bluesky PBLLC is choosing to platform vance, jesse singal and others; Their moderation is very akin to centrist beliefs, and as such quite weak in protecting especially those most vulnerable.

It's just that from a technical standpoint with how ATProto works, it doesn't quite make as much sense to block the server vance is currently on, it makes much more sense to block the account and associated did:plc identity ← This makes sure that even IF vance moves his account (although I'd doubt it) to another PDS, he will stay blocked on our infra.

No, we are not a bridge, here read our source code:

https://github.com/gabboman/wafrn/tree/main/packages/backend/atproto

We ingest the firehose directly, we interact with bluesky directly. You can even view bluesky accounts like, say, bluesky's own directly: https://app.wafrn.net/blog/@bsky.app

Notice how there's no bridgy in there? You can check my profile on the bluesky side at https://bsky.app/profile/alexia.at.app.wafrn.net too ← Notice how there's no bridgy here either?

Hello feditips.

I am a moderator at this instance you see me posting from, app.wafrn.net.

We have optional (read: opt-in) bluesky integration and we have just banned JD Vance

Yes, we can do that. Because yes, Bluesky is just a bit more open than you make it out to be