SorteKanin @ SorteKanin @feddit.dk

Posts

15

Comments

1,649

Joined

2 yr. ago

Well other admins should be entirely in their right to cut you off. Same as anyone should be able to block you. If another admin decides to cut you off, that's up to them, you can't stop that and shouldn't be able to. That is anyone's freedom.

But usually it is not a problem, as long as you are reasonable. Why would another admin block you if you are reasonable?

They really have as little power as they can given the constraints. If you don't want an admin to have power over a lot of people, join a small instance and advocate others do the same.

It really sounds like you just want to be your own admin though. Maybe a personal instance would be a way for you.

Again, then choose an admin or an instance that doesn't get defederated a lot. And as said elsewhere, you (or at least most people) don't want a scenario where you can't block other people or whole instances. Defederation is an important moderation tool.

You realize the way things work currently doesn’t prevent that, right?

It totally does prevent it because every community has a unique name, when you include the instance domain. Which is the whole point. The instance is where the community lives.

Indeed - that is why you should consider at least a little bit which admin you want to sign up with (i.e. which instance you choose). Choose an admin that wouldn't just do that willy-nilly (except maybe in cases where abuse/bad actors is obvious), but would only do it after careful consideration and maybe even with involvement from their users.

This is not an argument against the fediverse model of admins owning instances. It's just an argument for choosing good admins.

there’s a bunch of centralized authorities instead of one

I mean sorry but that's just what decentralization is, unless you want a fully peer-to-peer protocol which is not realistic at all.

I suppose communities would not have unique names then - otherwise I'll just go ahead and create communities from all the words in the dictionary and then I control all communities.

So if they don't have unique names, how in the world do we refer to them? By some opaque UUID or something? I mean I guess it's possible, maybe.

Who's hosting this new community you just made? Where does it live? The description of the community, you know the side bar in a Lemmy community, where is that physically speaking?

only mods should be able to ban me from specific communities

As I stated elsewhere, I don't really see how you can even have mods without admins.

But how is admins banning you from an instance any different than a mod banning you from a community? Why are you okay being banned from a community by a mod but not okay being banned by an admin from an instance? Isn't it the same conceptually speaking, just on a different moderation/administration level?

If there are no admins, who can ever decide who is a moderator? How do you decide that? The way it is currently decided is via admins granting mods powers on communities on that admin's instance. If you don't have admins, I don't see how you could possibly have mods.

Yea... I get what you mean. There isn't really an instance that is "not zero defederation"-moderated and general enough for all people if you take out lemmy.world. That's honestly kind of surprising, it feels like a niche that more players could fill. But I guess that's how lemmy.world got as big as it did.

If you had to give one suggestion, maybe. But still, any instance matching geographical location or a specific of your interest would be better.

Honestly that's why email has stuck around. Can you imagine if one company controlled email? That would've enshittified and shut down years ago lol

This should hopefully get better over time as some instances stick around for longer. You'll be able to point to instances that have stuck around for a while, which means they'll probably stick around for some time longer. The problem right now is that the fediverse and many instances are still young, and something that started yesterday is not too likely to still exist tomorrow.

Would it have helped Cohost survive?

Well in theory if cohost was decentralized, the instance that is now shutting down would just be one of many. As it is, it's one of one, the only one.

Plenty of Lemmy instances have shut down, some less abruptly than others. One cohost instance shutting down is not that remarkable, all things considered. It's only remarkable cause there's just one instance.

If you follow that logic, people should never be able to block or ban you? That makes no sense. Of course anyone should be allowed to block anyone else for whatever reason they choose. That's what defederation is as well. If you don't have the option of blocking or banning, stuff degenerates really badly and really quickly.

I always point new users to Lemm.ee nowadays.

Most people are not interested in moderating their own feed. Leading people to an instance that does very little moderation on the defederation side of things could push them away. In that situation, they are likely to just leave the fediverse altogether and less likely to go to another instance I would say. I respect lemm.ee as an instance but I would not recommend it as a "gateway drug" to the fediverse.

In the end it’s just a bunch of centralized websites sharing content if the admins feel like it

The whole point of the fediverse is having a choice of admin. That democratizes the space because people can choose where to go. The point is not to rid yourself of admins entirely (or at least not without just becoming your own admin, but then there is still an admin, it's just yourself).

Make all content available to all and have people develop a UI to access it, let the users curate their feed.

Sorry but the vast majority of users are not interested in curating their feed. Most people don't want to also be moderators. I mean fuck it's difficult to even recruit mods for even medium-sized communities. Most people don't like "absolute free speech" and want some level of moderation. Making all content available is not a path towards healthy platforms - it runs into the nazi bar problem instantaneously.

I won't even comment on the herculean technical challenge of doing it in the way you describe, but even if it was possible, I don't think it's actually desirable. It sounds good on the surface, but that's about it.

The choice of instance is kind of a big barrier though. There's also a lot of bad UX around discoverability.

... What? Okay I get all of them except the SNQ one.

That is a nice success story!

But this is only a default right? Surely an admin can open registration anyway?