Edit 4:
This has more than substantial community support, and is being put into effect immediately.
Please bear with me on the sidebar edit, as I’m not going to be in front of my PC for a bit.
As previously mentioned this will remain up for the week to allow for refinement for edge cases if possible, and be aware I’m trying to see what I can do to make this more of a direct vote on specific options going forward. If anyone believes this needs revisiting after the week is up, please feel free to start a conversation on it.
May your latency be low and your uptimes be high!
Edit 3 - further refining.
There are some rather… unique interpretations of what a promo post is, along with an important note that some people lurk. Its important though that they participate somewhere to make sure its not a drive-by ad, but its fair to say that there are users in programming, linux, and other communities whose posts would be welcomed by users here.
Its also important to users here that its not just post and disappear.
So I’m adjusting to:
Promotion posts require your active participation in selfhosting or related communities, or the post will be removed. No more than 10% of your posts or comments may be self-promotional, or your post will be removed. F/LOSS Exception: If your post is about a project that is completely open source & can be self-hosted in full without payment, your post is exempt from this rule as long as you continue to engage in comments.
EDIT 2 AT THE TOP AGAIN:
It seems there is some confusion around the term “promo posts”, so I’m making another adjustment for clarity. If this is muddying the waters instead, please point that out!
Self-promotion posts advertising their product requires community participation, or they will be removed. No more than 10% of your posts or comments may be self-promotional, or your post will be removed. F/LOSS Exception: If your post is about a project that is completely open source & can be self-hosted in full without payment, your post is exempt from this rule.
I worry a bit that its getting unwieldy, so feel free to suggest options to clean up the language a bit.
EDIT AT THE TOP:
Promotional posts require community participation or they will be removed. No more than 10% of your posts or comments may be self-promotional, or your post will be removed. F/LOSS Exception: If your post is about a project that is completely open source & can be used in full without payment, it will be exempt from this rule.
Intended to clarify on “paywall” - it has to be open source and run in full locally, no one-time or subscription-locked payment for features, to qualify. Donations don’t count as that doesn’t limit use, while something like Kavita (which has non-free features behind a subscription, despite the base being open source) would not have the benefit of exemption. The rule intent hasn’t changed here, just the wording on the exemption limitations.
I’ve gotten through (I believe) all the comments in the meta thread. So I want to establish a few things, first being a better definition on spam.
Spam is not “I don’t like this and its a paid product” or “I don’t like this and they used AI/LLMs”.
Spam would generally be considered:
- Mass-posting - Posting the exact same post across a bunch of of different communities, rapidly.
- Repetitive Content (aka karma farming) - repeatedly submitting old popular content. I’ll note that this is completely irrelevant on lemmy, this was more of a reddit issue due to karma.
- Bot Activity / AI Abuse - Using scripts/bots/gen AI to automate posts and comments.
- Unsolicited DMs - Mass private messages or chats to users, completely unsolicited
I’d say anything other than that deserves a followup rule, and this definition should go in the sidebar.
Regarding the promotional posts themselves, I think something like the 10% rule makes sense - no more than 10% of the account should be self-promotional material or comments within the community.
I do think it makes sense to include an exception for 100% free/libre open source projects. Partially open projects with a closed (paid) component should be subject to the 10% rule. So what I propose as the rule would be:
Promotional posts require community participation or they will be removed. No more than 10% of your posts or comments may be self-promotional, or your post will be removed. F/LOSS Exception: If your post is about a project that is completely open source & without any paywalls, it will be exempt from this rule.
Questions, comments, clarifications, and harsh criticisms are welcomed in the comments. As a reminder from my intro post, and because of some comments in the other thread, I will mention:
There are people on both sides of the keyboards, so please be respectful of others.
You must log in or register to comment.
Nice to see the changes, but may I ask if tagging could be beneficial?
Surely it would help to sort out self promotion, help requests and informational posts.
Also, since we’re all in the lemmy-bubble, a lot of people may despise vibe-coded projects, at least it looks/feels like it, so it may be worth tagging project with AI code?
I’m maybe narrow-minded, but please enlighten me^^
I actually do want tagging of some sort, I think its a sensible approach overall. I think its a quick way to identify that your project used AI and people can quickly filter, per your example.
That said, I think that should be a separate item, and I don’t want to inundate with stickies either. That was going to be my next “oh look a mod is annoying us with his opinion again” post, but then we ended up seeing a ton of promo content this week. I’m trying to stick to a mod post every week or two so everyone has a chance to see and respond to things.
That said, if you want to get that discussion ball rolling, feel free to make a meta post about it of course!
Thanks for your work, time and effort. I also think, it would be better to separate it and first end the discussion about promotions and co, so it could settle before kicking of another round^^
Re: AI tags. I disagree, for reasons I outlined here
https://lemmy.ml/post/48724623/26190950
TL;DR: in 2026, assume ALL projects have AI assist. Then do your due diligence.
Really doesn’t address the issue at all.
Because its not just user due diligence, but what the comment threads become.
This is a discussion for another round though, not for this rule.
We might be talking past each other here or actually agreeing.
But yes, this belongs in a separate [META] thread. It’s a discussion that needs to be had IMHO.
You are welcome to make one, but to note I am avoiding inundating the community with discussions, so I won’t be making one (or a rule post followup like this) until next week. Trying to avoid having too many at once.
So doing nothing is the way? There are useful project created with AI but also a lot of harmful ones.
Even I know, that the bigger part of selfhosters are copy and pasting guides and aren’t developer themselve, so why should we not try and at least warn these people?
OK but isn’t that also true of non AI projects? Famously, XZ utils?
I would hate to see this happen
- [AI TAG] - slop, derision, FOAD
- [NOT AI] - all good!
Tagging something ai or not ai is no guarantee of non-malefescence. Due diligence is required in both circumstances.
It’s a bit like those Nigerian prince scam emails of yore. If you can’t grok why it’s bad, no amount of “this email is probably spam” being appended to the header will save you.
I’m totally on your side about awareness and “you have to check it yourself”.
Nobody is telling AI aided projects are bad. Nobody is saying vibe-coded projects are bad.
The problem with vibe-coded projects is, that on average, the code isn’t checked by the owner itself. Surely there a some people using AI as aid and check it afterwards but this is sadly only a small proportion.
In my honest opinion, we should not create rules around exceptions.
We’re currently in a timeline, where it’s hard to tell what is right and what is wrong about AI usage but we have to start somewhere…
I would hate to see this happen
- [AI TAG] - slop, derision, FOAD
- [NOT AI] - all good!
Which is what is happening now without the tag as soon as someone sees “AI”, regardless of what its doing, how it was used, or if its even related to the development.
Yes, that’s what I’m saying. So an AI tag at best does nothing and at worst buries potential useful projects.
I think you’re missing the part where this happens now.
Having an AI tag also means that posting comments to complain about using AI is off-topic and would be removed.
Maybe. So let me steelman what I think you’re saying.
It seems like you’re making a case for some kind of loop - AI tag means you can’t complain about AI tagged posts, and if you do, your post gets removed.
Have I represented your position fairly?
My counter point is - if the hostility already exists without a tag, that confirms the tag isn’t a cultural fix.
If complaints about AI use become off-topic and get removed, you haven’t improved the community’s relationship with AI content, you’ve just suppressed the feedback loop.
Is that really the right direction, given the reality of AI assistance in coding?
The hostility doesn’t go away. It goes underground, or people leave anyway.
Moderating away dissent isn’t community health, it’s just quieter dissent.
The community reacting negatively to AI content is the signal. A tag that makes that signal removable isn’t a solution, it’s a lid on a pot.
I’m not calling for some grand destigmatization of slop, I’m calling for nuance and education.
Which ultimately is beyond the scope of a mod…but you’re the one wearing the cape. What sort of house do you want to run?
Let’s at least not do something that propagates the knee jerk “fuckAI and fuck you” Lemmy is famous for.
It’s a hard problem, to be sure. Maybe your AI tag is a fair enough step for now.
I’m a lurker, I potentially comment but usually there is not much to add when the pros have posted, so if I’d try to promote my secure, takedownsafe P2P sharing protocol (if people started using it, everyone could have a web-space, backups, a “drop-box”, an online presence, and more), it’d be kicked?
I’m just trying to understand where I am, the overall rule is completely understandable.
No, you’re pretty active in general, so it would be left up.
But I see what you’re saying, it would be better to amend the community part. The 10% should really be said as your activity and not specific to the community.
I’m going to make an edit, thanks
Understood
FOSS / FLOSS isn’t nec. free (gratis) though. We might end up yak shaving with these definitions. Better to have a singular rule for all?
I’m thinking of it from both mods side and community side. Obnoxious advertising - FOSS or otherwise - is obnoxious.
10% rule is a good one. 30 day rule is another good one. Use both?
IMHO.
FOSS / FLOSS isn’t nec. free (gratis) though. We might end up yak shaving with these definitions.
And if it is paywalled in any way it wouldn’t meet the criteria for exemption in the first place, so that would be a non-issue.
As far as the 30 day rule goes, thats basically an outright ban on promo posts given the current status of the fediverse.
On the 30 day rule: I come back to the “what is this space” question.
Is it a men’s shed? Is it free to air TV? Is it Avon knocking on my door?
What frame of reference are we operating from here?
If it’s a communal space where journeymen share tips and tricks, then “pay your fees” (with 30 days of good faith participation first) seems to guard (historically) against aggressive advertising.
ICBW and YMMV.
All that does (IMO) is make you wait, not participate.
The point of the rule is just a way to weed out commercial marketing posts when there is no involvement / visibility on the fedi, so it isnt just being used as an avenue to advertise.
So I don’t see what the 30 day rule is adding for everyone that isn’t covered by the 10% rule, so not sure others will either. What’s it adding for the community?
Waiting is the point. People who are here to post and run will neither have the patience, nor the good will, to wait 30 full days before accumulating the social capital to blab about their project.
I’m not proposing “bot signs up, waits 30 days, then posts”. That’s a known escape velocity. 30 days by itself isn’t the solution because it can be gamed (esp without karma).
OTOH, everything proposed so far can also be gamed.
I’m merely suggesting a human mod reviewable method, that is also transparent and simple to follow for users.
If you can’t automate this, you either need hard rules (which will stifle convos - which was part of the issue with rule 3) OR you need a defensible rubric.
You can choose which, but there’s a constraints based reason why fora keep circling this sort of solution.
Waiting is the point. People who are here to post and run will neither have the patience, nor the good will, to wait 30 full days before accumulating the social capital to blab about their project.
What social capital is being built by waiting over an active participation requirement?
OTOH, everything proposed so far can also be gamed.
How?
Low effort comments would just be considered spam in the first place, so how can it be gamed?
I’m merely suggesting a human mod reviewable method, that is also transparent and simple to follow for users.
Its all human (me) reviewed, through a posted process that is transparent and simple to follow. Whats the difference?
If you can’t automate this, you either need hard rules (which will stifle convos - which was part of the issue with rule 3) OR you need a defensible rubric.
The issue with rule 3 was a completely subjective interpretation of what was selfhosting as determined by that mod, which then made the community believe there were hit and run posts happening, and the posters believe this to be a hostile community (it was).
Nothing is being automated, I review every report. The tools aren’t there imo to automate much of anything successfully.
I’m not saying no here, to be clear, I’m asking what this actually adds because I’m not seeing it.
What social capital is being built by waiting over an active participation requirement?
Display of patience and good will, as I said.
If you can’t wait 30 days AND engage in actual discussion BEFORE posting your amazing project, that’s a clear breach of the unspoken social contract.
Again - I’m saying these things are cumulative.
30 days + posts + 10%.
Any one or the other can be gamed.
Sign up for 30 days, do nothing, post ad = you technically waited 30 days.
Posts = “sounds great!”, “I love Syncthing!”, “Have you tried Jellyfin?” (or better LLM crafted variants) and THEN hit with ad = you technically engaged with the community.
10% = 9 fillers, 1 ad = you technically met the 10% rule.
How
See above
Low effort comments would just be considered spam in the first place, so how can it be gamed?
“Low effort” is doing some work there. How are you going to define it?
Its all human (me) reviewed, through a posted process that is transparent and simple to follow. Whats the difference?
That’s exactly my point. A+B+C = less decision pain for you, less gray area for posters. So long as both sides are clear on what A+B+C constitute.
The issue with rule 3 was a completely subjective interpretation of what was selfhosting as determined by that mod, which then made the community believe there were hit and run posts happening, and the posters believe this to be a hostile community (it was).
Correct. And it stifled discussion. We’re not disagreeing here.
Nothing is being automated, I review every report. The tools aren’t there imo to automate much of anything successfully.
Still not disagreeing.
I’m not saying no here, to be clear, I’m asking what this actually adds because I’m not seeing it.
Multiplicity of signals, transparency and clear expectations.
So the one thing I think that may be good about it is preventing the same day join and post something blatantly vibe coded but not disclosing type posts.
It may have a negative impact on new-to-lemmy devs, but we need to find some sort of balance.
Posts = “sounds great!”, “I love Syncthing!”, “Have you tried Jellyfin?” (or better LLM crafted variants) and THEN hit with ad = you technically engaged with the community.
No, you spammed low effort comments that are easily seen.
“Low effort” is doing some work there. How are you going to define it?
The way its pretty universally defined…
One-word/overly simplistic replies, unrelated content, vague comments/complaints, etc. Its not something you can automate, but when an account is full of just that its quite obvious. “Low effort” for comments and posts have been in common usage for 15-20 years now. Its not exactly new or poorly misunderstood.
Multiplicity of signals, transparency and clear expectations.
I can only see it having value for paid products though, and even there its questionable of value to me. Waiting a day or a week or a month, what difference would that make if they are actively and positively engaging with the community?
Acronyms, initialisms, abbreviations, contractions, and other phrases which expand to something larger, that I’ve seen in this thread:
Fewer Letters More Letters Git Popular version control system, primarily for code NAS Network-Attached Storage Plex Brand of media server package VPN Virtual Private Network
4 acronyms in this thread; the most compressed thread commented on today has 5 acronyms.
[Thread #24 for this comm, first seen 23rd Jun 2026, 05:20] [FAQ] [Full list] [Contact] [Source code]
