Can we make some root cause analysis? Why is it a problem that certain communities are only on one instance?
Or better, why do communities need some relationship to an instance?
this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024
157 points (86.9% liked)
Fediverse
28386 readers
659 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to [email protected]!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I think decentralization is preferable for a wide variety of reasons, most of which boil down to stability and adaptability.
As for why communities need to be associated with an instance, I think that's a much more interesting question. The first thing that comes to mind is moderation and liability. Ultimately, someone needs to be held responsible if shit hits the fan and somebody hires a contract killing on Lemmy or something. Right now, those people are the instance admins. If you could have free floating communities, the moderators of the distributed community would need to take on that responsibility instead.
Also how would that work technically? Stuff would presumably still need to be hosted and mirrored on instances, even if technically "unaffiliated".
What I am thinking as a possible solution would be to have some type of "community server", akin to email list servers. The admin of the server becomes a "mere" service provider, and those that create communities are then responsible for moderation and that content being hosted there.
I believe that this would be perfectly possible to implement with Lemmy, so much so that I will add some of this functionality to Fediverser as part of my NLNet grant. The question is: who else would be interested in hosting these fediverser-enabled instances?
The admin of the server becomes a “mere” service provider, and those that create communities are then responsible for moderation and that content being hosted there.
Would you be able to prevent admins to interfere with moderation of the communities? Seems to be the biggest issue here
Theoretically, any admin would still have access to the server and make changes to things.
Practically, no. Anyone providing this service would be a hosting provider. If something bad happens at the community, they would only be able to claim it's not their responsibility if they are able to point to the actual moderator who is liable.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
Hello Raphael,
For the first question, I redirect you to the thread linked in the OP: https://lemmy.world/post/16211417
For the second question, I guess this is beyond the scope of this discussion. Having communities unlinked to an instance would require a complete rework of Lemmy, this thread is just about moving away from lemmy.ml due to some abuse reported in the other thread.
What If I told you that it does not require a complete rework of Lemmy, but instead just additional services to use instances as independent "ActivityPub group servers"?
Copy all the local only communities from each instance .world and .ml separately put in a excel spreadsheet control F search each community
Feel like that would be easier.....
EDIT: I counted 50 pages of communities just for .world before I stopped counting. So that's like a lot of fucking work....
The only way this makes sense to do, is for an admin who has access to the lemmy database. .World database, to do this themselves. I'm assuming with their admin server privileges it would be the fastest most accurate way.
But then they'd have to manually do .ml bc I doubt ml will do that to help them lol
Feel free!
On my side I feel like most of https://lemmy.ml/communities are already covered. This post is for communities that other people have already identified as "not having alternatives" (see complaints on the other post), so they should know them already.
Good luck
Privacy: [email protected]
[email protected] is a good one. The instance admin comes and go, but the instance is still up-to-date
Other active options:
I like [email protected] because the project is behind it
Whenever friends ask about resources, I always link them to the privacyguides website. I should use their community more as well
Some more options for those looking.
Just had a look:
- [email protected]: site seems down? http://monero.house/
- [email protected]: last posts 4 hours and 9 days ago
- [email protected]: last post 4 days ago
- [email protected]: last post 11 days ago
- [email protected]: last post 3 hours and 8 hours ago
- [email protected]: site is down: https://community.nicfab.it/c/privacy
Added lemmy.ca and LW to the top comment
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
Personal finance: [email protected]
There are a few country-based:
Maybe it makes more sense to have country-based communities?
load more comments
(2 replies)
Open source: [email protected]
- [email protected] seems like a nice alternative (more subs than [email protected])
Seems like a community that has it's natural home at programming.dev.
Indeed
there's also [email protected]
I'm always torn with Beehaw as they defederated lemmy.world and sh.itjust.works.
Posting there just mean that a third of Lemmy won't see your post.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Linux: [email protected]
[email protected] seems quite active, I guess if any people move to it it will become even more active.
[email protected] could probably be a nice one too if people want to avoid hypercentralization on LW
If you know any other, comment below and we can see which one we decide to select as "the one" to avoid fragmentation.