This is in regard to Lemmy.world blocking piracy communities from other instances. This post is not about whether you agree with the decision. It's about how the admins informed their users.

A week ago Lemmy.world announced their Discord server. This wasn't very well received (about 25% downvotes, which is rather bad compared to other announcements). The comments on that post were turned off, presumably to avoid backlash.

Before that, announcements about the instance used to be posted to !lemmyworld@lemmy.world. This time, the information was posted on the Discord server instead.

I don't agree with this. Having to use a proprietary platform to participate in an open-source one goes against the very purpose for me, especially when the new solution isn't really an improvement (as before the information about the platform was closer to it).

Edit: Corrected the announcements community name.

Update: Lemmy.world finally released an announcement and promised they would inform about similar actions and gather feedback in advance in future.

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

[–] vlad76@lemmy.sdf.org 19 points 1 year ago (39 children)

The moment I learned about defederation, I made an account on an instance that didn't do that.

Here's a website you can use to check what your instance is blocking.

https://fba.ryona.agency/

[–] ziggurism@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (36 children)

can you recommend a good instance with a no defederation policy?

[–] joe@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (34 children)

An instance with no defederation policy is going to end up exactly like an instance with no moderation policy. It's going to become Voat or whatever the latest far-right website is these days.

You might be better served to seek out an instance with a transparent defederation policy, and admins that use it as a tool of last resort, instead of first resort. I was, perhaps mistakenly, under the impression that lemmy.world fit that bill, but maybe not so much.

[–] bilb@lem.monster 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

This isn't true, I think. You can have an instance that federates with nearly everyone but which still has a higher standard for behavior for its own users. This way, users on such an instance can see all the problematic instances but are not permitted to be problematic themselves. It's an option.

(Even still, I think you'd find yourself de-federating from someone eventually for spam or other technical reasons if not due to objections over content.)

[–] joe@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

It's a problem of scale. If you don't defederate from a racist-focused instance (for example; hypothetically speaking), then you need to devote resources to moderating those users who make racist comments, as allowed by their instance, but directed at your users. Sure, you could do this, but it's probably smarter to just defederate and save the resources for other uses. And no moderation team is going to be flawless, so racism will still creep in and be missed by the mod team.

It might be a different story if users are given the tools to block entire instances (like kbin has) but even then I think the ROI would be low.

load more comments (32 replies)

load more comments (33 replies)

load more comments (35 replies)