this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2025
57 points (89.0% liked)

Fediverse memes

1891 readers
107 users here now

Memes about the Fediverse.

Rules

General
Specific

Elsewhere in the Fediverse

Other relevant communities:

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 38 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

Good to know.

I'm not sure if this is pushing that, but I personally don't get the "fediverse mods/admins bad, centralised power has no benefit" argument. Like, duh. Of course they have control. That's how we're keeping the CSAM out.

Lemmy/Federated social media is FOSS. Instance admins have direct physical access to their instances. In theory, they can alter them to function however they like.

The deal is this, they keep being BDFLs, or we users replace them by setting up our own instance/community.

The difference between corporate social media, and here, is that none of us can just decide to become a facebook admin. And if we could, no-one could escape our decisions by switching instances.

If you think there's a problem, and aren't prepared to set out and become a fediverse admin yourself in order to solve it, or fork the codebase if you think mod and admin features shouldn't exist, then you're just waiting for someone else to solve these problems.

If you are prepared to run an instance, or create a fork, then you are the solution to the problem you are complaining about.

[–] Mika@sopuli.xyz 2 points 6 days ago (2 children)

I don't like fediverse architecture, I'd rather have moderation to be subscription-based (like you sub to a hide/banlist), to separate the concerns. Ofc platform admins should still have rights to ban those who try to destroy the communication itself, like posting 10k messages a thread etc.

I don't care much about it in lemmy cause idgaf about my account here, I could create a new one and no value is lost. However, if account itself and people subscribing to you is valuable, this tech sucks.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I completely disagree.

The same person who creates a niche instance/community, is often ideal for moderating it. The fostering of a community around a given subject (not people) is what motivates volunteer maintenance of said community.

What's the incentive for your subscription banlist maintainers? How would communities form in such a system?

[–] Mika@sopuli.xyz 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You say community as if it's not just an access point to the federation.

incentices

Show the amount of subs on the moderation stream - topN can be proud of themselves. Can ask for donations too I guess.

how would communities form

I imagine some space for moderation of specific subjects would emerge, like you don't want to see nazies = you run nazi-block list & check out others lists. Moderation could be thematic and specific.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 5 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

You seem to be confusing my use of the word community with lemmy terminology. I am using it both as that, and as its dictionary definition.

Bragging rights and money are not healthy motivators. You'd be replacing personal interest, in the subject at hand. That puts every other potential motivator to shame.

Moderation could be thematic and specific.

It isn't already?

You're suggesting communities will form in the negative space created by people removing the same things. I don't think that'd work.

And it's definitely not how you foster niche communities. That's how you drown them. Currently they survive in positive space, where even a small numbers of users, browsing using their subbed feed, leads to regular activity even with a tiny usercount. Even as the posts are essentially invisible in all.

I am asking how would such communities in your system survive, let alone form? Tags completely disconnected from a host instance?

[–] irelephant@anarchist.nexus 1 points 4 days ago

That's what bluesky does for their decentralized network.