Incredible to think about that we got it right the first time (with email) and still had to spend the last 20 years complaining about centralized social networks.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] humiddragonslayer@lemm.ee 10 points 5 days ago (3 children)

I think a surefire way to help with this would be to have a rule that any instance that becomes the largest one on Lemmy should lock itself instantly. That way, we'll only surpass the current max number of users on a single instance until it's completely spread out

[–] Smokeydope@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I'm not sure the smaller Lemmy servers running on a pi or resident internet upload could handle the equal sizable fraction of .world . it would be interesting to calculate how many users total on Lemmy divided by how many public joinable instances and see the averages or which servers are forced to scale the most.

This would take away complete user freedom to choose the server they want which is controversial.

[–] Ziglin@lemmy.world 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I would suggest giving it a smallish margin so that it wouldn't get annoying with two similarly sized instances.

[–] humiddragonslayer@lemm.ee 1 points 4 days ago

Fair point

[–] JustAnotherKay@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago

This sounds neat, I kinda like this