this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2023
3 points (100.0% liked)

Fediverse

28281 readers
635 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 !moderators@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'm one of the people who has very recently tried Lemmy and decided to drop Reddit. Initially because I will no longer be able to use SyncForReddit, but now also because I just like the vibe a lot more here than Reddit.

I'm not a massively technical person, but I understood the broad concept of federation - different instances/servers that sync to form a big conversation/forum of sorts.

I heard a lot of people joining and saying positive things about lemmy.world, so I signed up there.....and that's it.

But, am I using it right? Is the idea to sign up in one place and use it to participate across the LemmyVerse/FediVerse? Or should I be seeking out lots of niche instances of interest?

I hear lemmy.world is the biggest instance. What if most people end up here, does that defeat the purpose? Is this inevitable?

You need a critical mass of users, so a quiet instance with few posts is not attractive. If I search for Xbox, there are lots of empty places or places with 3 posts. If there's one big one (often ends up being in lemmy.world) that's where I'm subscribing.

How are you using Lemmy, are you participating in a bunch of instances or just one?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Risk@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Sure, but I don't think beehaw's philosophy suits the fediverse very well. They want to create a safer space where discussion and disagreement is encouraged, but more closely policed. Which makes sense for a closed system - not one where "unpoliced" users can interact with your community. Otherwise you end up playing server whack-a-mole... exactly like beehaw has done.

[–] Ulu-Mulu-no-die@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I don't think beehaw doesn't fit the fediverse, I do believe it doesn't fit every user.

As I understand it, they want to be a safe place for a very specific audience, that is, people afraid to be harassed for who they are, that could also include people with extreme social anxiety, that's why it's so heavily policed and they defederate from a lot of other instances.

It's like having a heavily moderated subreddit, you wouldn't say it doesn't fit reddit just because they don't accept contribution from everyone.

The purpose of the fediverse is to have things spread out so one or few nodes dying doesn't affect the entire system, it's also about avoiding corporate control, the same principles on which the internet was founded.

I don't think it means having to trust everyone or accepting everyone into your local group.

[–] Risk@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (5 children)

The purpose of the fediverse is to have things that are spread out and can talk to each other, right?

My point was only beehaw trying to cultivate a safe space that is closely policed isn't easily compatible with that baked-in interaction with other spaces which they can't police. Unless they play server whack-a-mole.

And then once large instances are cut off because they contain too many users to police when they interact on beehaw.org - what's the point in being part of the fediverse? Why not just be any other type of link aggregating forum?

It would make a little more sense if you could defederate unilaterally (i.e. non beehaw members cannot post on beehaw, but beehaw members can go interact on other instances). But as far as I understand that's not how it works.

[–] Ulu-Mulu-no-die@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

(i.e. non beehaw members cannot post on beehaw, but beehaw members can go interact on other instances). But as far as I understand that’s not how it works.

It depends, you believe that's not how it works because you're thinking of both sides defederating each other, but defederation is one-side.

For example, beehaw defederated from lemmy.world but lemmy.world didn't defederate from beehaw, so lemmy.world people cannot participate on beehaw but beehaw can participate on lemmy.world.

It's actually a bit more complicated than that, since lemmy.world people can still participate in beehaw discussions but only lemmy.world people would see those comment, I think also other instances that are not defederated can but I'm not sure about this.

[–] Risk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You sure about that? I'm pretty certain that unilateral defederation is not possible yet.

[–] Ulu-Mulu-no-die@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Risk@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah - what I meant by 'unilateral' is that beehaw defederating from .world is that .world users can't interact with beehaw communities, PLUS beehaw.org users can't interact with .world communities.

Unilateral defederation to me would mean the first case, but not the second.

[–] Ulu-Mulu-no-die@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

But beehaw users can interact with .world communities if they want, it's .world users that wouldn't see it.

There's probably no purpose in doing that, but it is possible.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)