Asklemmy

test

Users: 380 (well for several months :check mark:)
Posts: 312 (not good :cross mark:, should be > 3 per non-banned user)
Comments: 317 (:white question mark:)

There might be something wrong in users' interest in Lemmy :sad but relieved face:

As far as I know there is still no federation for Lemmy, correct? So what's the biggest hurdle to getting started and how do we resolve it?

I like dark green, how about you all?

Blog or otherwise. Bonus points if it isn't technology.

I got mine from a song I like https://invidio.us/watch?v=Gy88-5pc7c8&autoplay=0&continue=0&dark_mode=true&listen=0&local=1&loop=0&nojs=0&player_style=youtube&quality=hd720&thin_mode=true

title

Here's a pattern you've probably seen:

1. Racists/nazi shows up and says racist/nazi things
2. Get called out for it and/or banned
3. They claim they are unfairly banned "for disagreeing." They completely leave out the part about them being a racist nazi.

You know, that move. I've seen it more times than I can count and I bet you have too. They call disagreement with nazism "opinions you don't like", leaving out the nazism part. Any way of framing disagreements with them while subtracting out the actual content of what they say.

It's so common that I think it deserves a word. I know there are generic descriptions: e.g. "being a troll", but I think something specific to this particular behavior deserves its own word. That way it can just be identified and dismissed for what it is and not argued with.

I always struggle with what sources I should be reading for news (particularly political news). I don't want to read only sources that I agree with, but I also struggle finding news sources that aren't sensationalist and put forward varied view points. Here are a few of the places I frequent (criticism of these sources or other recommendations are welcome.) I don't think my political news sources are well varied so any recommendations there would be great as well.

• hackernews
• arstechnica
• the economist
• axios
• MIT News
• Wired

This seems to be becoming the hot topic, the elephant in the chatroom - the balance between censorship / freedom of speech on lemmy. There are solid arguments for both ways, and good compromises too.

IMO the FAQ makes it quite clear what the devs have built here, and why. But recent discussions, arguments, make it clear that a lot of the most vocal users object to it.

I'm very curious. Many active users feel this way? Please vote using the up arrows in the comments.

For me, it was the toxic circlejerk (admins/mods as well) low quality content getting upvoted while high quality submissions not getting much attention/buried and obvious privacy issues.

These past weeks have been especially violent in Myanmar, with many protesters and non-protesters being tortured and murdered in the streets by the Junta..

In your opinion, how should the US government intervene, if at all?

reposts are bad, bla bla bla

but if almost nobody saw it before, or new people saw the repost for the first time, is it really a bad thing?

i see many reposts in communities, but both the [oc] and the [repost] do get many upvotes, which means that there are definitely some people who missed the post before; the question is: should reposts be allowed within a smaller time frame (if at all), and whether it’s worth the sacrifice of the imaginable property of q u a l i t y of content

i’m interested to hear what you think

So, lemmy is a project I have been following since the beggining. With federation here, it seems like everything is aligned for it to become the reddit killer, pardon my expression.

What do you think is missing from lemmy for it to have a massive engaging community?