lemm.ee has shut down at 00:14 UTC.

unfortunately I realized too late that I have had hundreds of saved links to posts and comments from there, so I did not have enough time to save them, but anyways it is interesting that maybe a third of the post links I could try were dead. I think linkrot is happening much faster here than on reddit, even if just counting deleted posts.

  • TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Why would people want to implement something they don’t know the benefits of? That’s what my comment and increasing awareness is all about, in a thread about an outcome that could have been prevented by the idea.

    • Blaze (he/him) @lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      If admins goes missing like the feddit.de ones did, the same problem would still impact that instance, be it a user or a content instance

      If admins just want to shutdown without willing to transfer the instance / domain like the lemm.ee ones did, the same problem would still impact that instance, be it a user or a content instance

      Using instances with non profit like https://fedecan.ca/en/ (lemmy.ca and piefed.ca) seems a better way to mitigate that risk.

      • TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        I think you are misunderstanding the problem being solved. Expecting all instances to become non-profits and manage even more responsibility exacerbates the problem and inhibits the fediverse growth. Non-profits also have their share of pitfalls and is an entirely different beast.

        lemm.ee told you the reason they were shutting down - not enough people to keep the place running and burnout. I can’t force you to see how minimizing and distributing responsibility helps those issues if you don’t want to. Less responsibility, easier for people not to ditch projects or end them.

        That has nothing to do about what they decided to do afterwards. I thank them for not transferring the instance domain to a completely different party without user consent, and people would have disagreed with that so it’s best everyone found their own solution. It would even have put their account information at risk.

        • Blaze (he/him) @lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 days ago

          lemm.ee told you the reason they were shutting down - not enough people to keep the place running and burnout. I can’t force you to see how minimizing and distributing responsibility helps those issues if you don’t want to. Less responsibility, easier for people not to ditch projects or end them.

          Lemm.ee had the option to close their registration at any time. But registrations are only one source of user management.

          In a scenario where Lemm.ee would have become a content instance, but kept their federation policy, they would still have received all the reports about posts on the communities they hosted, wherever the reported user comes from.

          Lemm.ee was the instance with the most active communities after LW, there’s no way to avoid a certain level of responsibility.

          • TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            Like I said, I can’t force you to see it.

            In a scenario where Lemm.ee would have become a content instance, but kept their federation policy, they would still have received all the reports about posts on the communities they hosted, wherever the reported user comes from.

            Being a dedicated content instance provider would also inherently imply dedicating that instance to a certain, more controlled type of content. An authentication instance might want to cater to a geography, which will probably decide to interact with the rest of the world and to provide adequate verification and certification mechanisms. A content instance might want to cater to a geography or a subject, resulting in specialized participation, with certification and verification based on the content, not the user.

            You keep seeing monolithic instances that congregate the most communities as a plus. That’s a negative in my perspective on the fediverse. It shouldn’t be competing reddit clones with the one having the most communities winning out.

            • Blaze (he/him) @lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              Being a dedicated content instance provider would also inherently imply dedicating that instance to a certain, more controlled type of content. An authentication instance might want to cater to a geography, which will probably decide to interact with the rest of the world and to provide adequate verification and certification mechanisms. A content instance might want to cater to a geography or a subject, resulting in specialized participation, with certification and verification based on the content, not the user.

              Those control mechanisms were available to lemm.ee. There’s a reason most active instances mostly defederate from certain instances.

              You keep seeing monolithic instances that congregate the most communities as a plus. That’s a negative in my perspective on the fediverse. It shouldn’t be competing reddit clones with the one having the most communities winning out.

              I don’t, I’m the one regularly pushing for more decentralization of communities (https://reddthat.com/post/20197120 , e.g. [email protected] vs [email protected])

              But I would rather have instances use the tools they currently have (and hopefully more will come with Piefed development catching up) rather than trying to re-engineer the whole platform when some instances don’t use the existing moderation tools.

              • TheObviousSolution@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                10 hours ago

                Like I said, I can’t force you to see it. The fact that you think it would mean re-engineering the whole platform means you aren’t getting it. It’s almost literally the suggestion of least effort, it’s largely an organizational change that encourages instances not to cope with more responsibility than they can deal with by encouraging decoupling the current structure into two more specialized ones.

                If you want re-engineering the whole platform, then I would suggest having all instances be authentication instances and rather than “host” communities to allow users to broadcast to community labels. Have any number of moderation groups be able to be created in an organized on that label or a personalized way by allowing users to select their own curators, perhaps even extrapolating it from the downvotes of trusted users and prioritizing the ranking of those they value. Work on providing a ground.news of discussions instead of biased takes and prunings from those in charge. Allow fast tracking of moderation across these adhoc groups for specially toxic content. That would solve the problem of nobody really going from a 10000 user community that has 100 daily posts to a 10 user community with 2-3 posts a week, because they would all operate within the same community but every user would be able to customize their perspective. The risk then is to balance the bubble they’ve created with transparency of all the other bubbles people are creating to interact with the community. Each particular instance would be able to be as biased as it wants to particular users or groups of users, but their content would truly be broadcast and federated.