Interesting! We’ve had quite a noticeable spike of sign-ups on lemm.ee as well
Interesting! We’ve had quite a noticeable spike of sign-ups on lemm.ee as well
I think it’s not really on your side, most likely either just something wrong on kbin.social itself, OR a side-effect of the measures lemmy.world implemented against kbin.social recently.
They are basically local-only communities on lemmy.world at this point, unfortunately. There is no federation to any other instance for any lemmy.world user posts on those communities.
Most actions federate, any exceptions which aren’t federated yet are generally just there because the federation logic has not been implemented (but improvements are constantly being worked on).
Generally federating the modlog is mostly just there for informative purposes. As in, we can check what mod actions were taken on instance A through the modlog on instance B (and there is no mechanism in Lemmy for other instances to retroactively remove or hide federated modlog items, btw).
That’s true, it will only show content which has been federated to lemm.ee, so indeed if you want to search for more content than is available on your instance, you would need some additional tools for that.
I’m a simple man:
“What day is it?” asked Pooh.
“It’s today,” squeaked Piglet.
“My favorite day,” said Pooh.
Should work just fine for posts and comments as well, for example, here’s a search result containing your comment
The built-in search feature is actually quite decent I find, is it not working well for you?
For context I use all of these daily: Linux (servers + handheld gaming), Windows (gaming), Mac OS (work & general purpose). I used one of the first iPhones around 2008, then exclusively Android for 10 years, and then back to iPhones.
Iphone users of Lemmy, people say not to trust you on tech insights.
IMO, these “people” with such takes are the only ones who shouldn’t be trusted on tech insights here :P
Awesome work!
Do you have an idea yet for the timeline of the 0.19.4 release?
IMO, in practical terms, 3 key things should imapct instance choice:
Content specialization really shouldn’t matter IMO, because as long as the federation policy is OK for you, then you can participate in any communities, regardless of what instance they are on. In other words, even if you’re super interested in french cinema, there is no need to centralize all users interested in this topic on a single french cinema instance. Thanks to federation, users from all instances (accounting for federation policy) should be able to become fully fledged participants in any french cinema communities.
Of the points I listed above, #1 and #2 are easier to include in an instance introduction, I’m not sure how to properly and reliably reflect #3 in any kind of overview. At the end of the day, I think most users tend to figure out their long-term home instance a while after they first join Lemmy, and quite often, it’s not their original instance, so maybe it’s not that important to emphasize the initial instance choice too much?
I am very sad about the situation with Beehaw specifically.
I think it’s a very unfortunate case where all parties have the best intentions of building something great with Lemmy, but through different circumstances, relations have soured and involved people no longer think they have a shared vision (which in my opinion is actually not true - I believe that Beehaws vision fits in very well with the direction Lemmy is going, especially with private communities being planned soon).
I am still hopeful that things can be improved, but we will see.
I think something is being lost in communication here. Nothing is being destroyed.
I keep seeing this disconnect, I think it needs to be emphasized: Lemmy maintainers have been focusing (and continue to focus on) safety and moderation improvements. Anybody can verify this by looking through PRs/commits/RFCs on GitHub.
I think I understand where the disconnect is coming from - there have been a few responses in some of these threads by Lemmy devs where they tell people to be less rude and demanding, and to contribute if they desperately want some feature. Perhaps as an observer, this sounds like “we do not care about mod tools” or whatever, but reality is just different.
Perhaps it would be useful to do a more in-depth post about all the stuff Lemmy devs have worked on and are currently working on? I mean things like:
I feel like there is this meme developing in Lemmy that maintainers are putting out a message of not caring about mod tools, which anybody with context will know is completely false, but I think most Lemmy users (and even many admins!) just don’t have this context.
The core issue here is that there are too many things to do, and too few developers to do them. By the way, for a huge number of these things that need to be done, there is most likely at least one person who thinks it’s the absolute highest priority for Lemmy. Forking would not help fix this issue, it would only make it worse.
In other words: if you’re a Rust dev, you can just fix it in Lemmy anyway, so there is no benefit from forking. If you’re not a Rust dev, then after forking, you will have a new repo to create issues on, except you’ll have 0 devs to actually fix them.
I think separate report inboxes are needed for the report reasons approach as well. This RFC doesn’t prevent having report reasons, rather I think it brings us closer to that goal.
Thanks for the thoughts!
Why not take this approach to simplify it then?
Yeah, the wording can be changed, I’m adding a note about it to the RFC
But I should be able to mark a report complete if I have dealt with it. Otherwise I’m just going to go to the post and sort it out anyway, so its just adding complexity. Barriers/extra steps to administration is not the way forward here.
I think in this particular case, some barriers are crucial. At the very least, I think we need to have warnings/extra confirmations when an admin wants to resolve a mod report.
I mean, if an admin handles it to the point where mods can’t take any further actions anyway (ban + content removal), then the report is automatically resolved already, so there is no need to manually resolve. OTOH, if an admin handles it in a way that a mod might still want to take additional action (for example, the admin just removes a comment), a mod might still want to take further action (for example, ban the offending user from their community), but if the admin marks the mod report as resolved, the mod will most likely end up never seeing it.
I am legally on the hook for content on my instance, not the moderators, and proposing changes that make it harder to be an admin is a touch annoying.
Btw, I don’t think any admin actions should be made harder, I am only talking about adding barriers to resolving reports which are in mod inboxes, and when I say “resolving reports”, I am literally just talking about marking the report as resolved (this shouldn’t really be a common action for admins - it’s akin to marking DMs as read for other users IMO). I don’t want to limit admins in any way from banning/removing content/anything like that.
No. This is a step backwards in transparency and moderation efforts. Granularity and more options is not always a good thing. If you’ve ever had the misfortune of using Meta’s report functionality you’ll know how overly complex and frustrating their report system is to use with all their “granularity”.
Agreed, I think that’s in line with why I proposed not going that path in the RFC as well.
To add: I would suggest thinking about expanding this to notify the user a report has been dealt with/resolved, optionally including rationale, because that feedback element can sometimes be lacking.
I think that would a good additional feature, but orthogonal to this particular RFC (I mean, neither feature depends on each other)
That particular instance was very recently the source of a lot of CSAM and spam, so that’d be why. A lot of instances recently upped their security to combat that.
Just to add some more context, there was an attacker recently who created accounts on several Lemmy instances and used those accounts to spread CSAM. On lemm.ee, this attacker created 4 accounts over a 24h period, but was not able to upload any CSAM to our servers due to our stricter upload rules (we require 4 week old accounts to upload any images at all), and all of the 4 accounts were removed very shortly after creation (most of them within an hour of signing up). The attacker gave up trying to use lemm.ee very quickly, and moved on to other instances.
I just wanted to share this context to illustrate that while indeed the different measures we implement to protect the instance can have a negative impact on legitimate users, I really believe that overall, they have a net positive effect. In addition to Cloudflare DDoS protection and image upload restrictions, we also have a separate content-based alerting layer on top of Lemmy, which allows our admins to quickly notice when something suspicious is going on. As another example, this alerting has allowed us to extremely efficiently deal with a current ongoing spam attack on the Fediverse, and I bet many lemm.ee users aren’t even aware of this attack due to the quick content removal. We will continue to improve our defenses, and hopefully try to limit the impact on real users as much as possible, but some trade-offs are necessary here in order to protect the overall userbase.
The nice thing about Lemmy is that you can always host your own instance, even if it’s only for your own individual use. You can basically use your own instance as a proxy - other instances will not see how or from where you are connecting to your instance.
Large instances are being attacked almost constantly at this point in smaller and bigger ways. Almost all measures we implement to combat these attacks come with some trade-offs for the rest of the userbase.
Or do you mean reports on content now go to the user’s home instance as well?
Yes, exactly.
Hi, there is no free speech policy on lemm.ee, we have very strict moderation when it comes to our rules. We regularly permaban users for breaking our instance rules. We simply don’t use defederation as a moderation tool, preferring other tools like user bans, for reasons outlined here: https://lemm.ee/post/35472386