Fediverse

28519 readers

304 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 [email protected]!

Rules

Posts must be on topic.
Be respectful of others.
Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
Follow the general 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 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

200

Lemmy needs better integration/federation. Too much content is hidden. A community on the biggest instance was not visible to me on another large instance. (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 10 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

115 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I did a search from shitjustworks for "reddit die" and did not find https://lemmy.world/c/watchredditdie so I made https://sh.itjust.works/c/watchredditdie (unnecessarily). This should really not happen. When someone makes a community there should be a "ping" sent out to notify all other federated instances.

And from what I know, if I post to !sh.itjust.works/c/watchredditdie only users on sh.itjust.works will see the posts until other people from other instances randomly come across it somehow and subscribe? This really needs to be improved.

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

[–] [email protected] -3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

There is a design conflict between on the one hand having the capability to locate and reach all instances of a thing, and on the other hand having those things be freely available to people.

This is, incidentally, why pro-2A people are so opposed to the idea of a gun registry.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm not understanding what the conflict is between being able to locate a thing and that thing being available for use.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I didn’t say able to locate I said there being a list. But in that case being able to locate is a better term. And I didn’t say available I said freely available, which is an important distinction.

If a thing’s existence always includes a route to finding it, that constrains its existence. Barriers in adding to the list, or in whatever finding mechanism you use, become barriers to the creation of an instance of that thing.

That’s one problem. There are others too, but if we can’t agree on this one then we’ve no hope of discussing the others.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I didn’t say able to locate I said there being a list.

Are you confusing comments?

I see this in the referred comment:

having the capability to locate

While the word "list" does not appear.

But mostly I think we should try to read the message, not focus on single words.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Okay. Anything else?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

Like, do you need me to break down what happened there for you? Are you asking whether I made a mistake because you don’t know, or … for some other reason?

Yes. I made a mistake. I think it’s weird you’re behaving as if you need me to confirm that, but sure. I thought I said “list”, and didn’t. Oops. Fortunately for me I never lie and hence it didn’t matter if I remembered what I said because I immediately recognized that “locate” is better terminology despite thinking it was your wording not mine so … are we good on that?

What were you gonna say in terms of responding to the message?