this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2025
49 points (96.2% liked)

Fediverse

21436 readers
57 users here now

A community dedicated to fediverse news and discussion.

Fediverse is a portmanteau of "federation" and "universe".

Getting started on Fediverse;

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
deadsuperhero@lemmy.ml
wakest@lemmy.ml
49
Fedia and Piefed have baked in code to block their users from seeing our replies, posts, and comments, while allowing a form of one way federation. (hexbear.net)
submitted 4 days ago by Nakoichi@hexbear.net to c/fediverse@lemmy.ml
92 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

I think this warrants a fediverse wide boycott of all piefed/fedia instances until this is rectified.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jet@hackertalks.com 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't know, this level of what about ism feels like an attack on a very real and legitimate issue

Absolutely I agree that pie feed does great things, and they're updating, but 100% this is a real legitimate issue. And it needs to be addressed.

Given this is the only place I have found this discussion happening in a productive way, we shouldn't sidetrack it.

Basically we're talking about the lead developer maturing and removing their opinions. It takes almost zero effort to code that, but it might take a lifetime of effort for them to come to that position.

I understand other commenters frustrations with your counters, it feels like a dismissal, this is a real problem affecting real users today and they have legitimate grievance. If they want to organize, that is very reasonable.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.zip 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Let me just reach out to the admin I quoted above. I'm not sure about the details of what they had to do during setup, maybe it's even easier that we thought.

Given this is the only place I have found this discussion happening in a productive way, we shouldn’t sidetrack it.

There is this post as well: https://hackertalks.com/post/15572214?scrollToComments=true

Comment from Rimu there: https://hackertalks.com/post/15572214/10757273

I understand other commenters frustrations with your counters, it feels like a dismissal, this is a real problem affecting real users today and they have legitimate grievance. .

Other commenters also state that changing those settings requires to fork the project, when it's just a settings modification

https://lemmy.zip/post/47272125/21126381

Frustration goes both ways

Edit: I did, I just pinged you there: https://hackertalks.com/post/15572214/10761436

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

  1. Thank you for providing links on my home instance, that is very considerate of you

  2. I don't think it matters how easy it is to opt out, the fact that a political opinion is the default is the problem.

  3. A fork is appropriate, to remove the political opinion, it can follow the other project with the modification to the block list.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)
  1. Trying to help, I know how tedious it can be sometimes
  2. As I said, it can be improved, but we probably disagree on the importance on that problem. It's minor for some people due to how easy the configuration can be changed, it's more important for other people. Everybody will have their opinion on the matter.
  3. I think you misunderstood. Here's the comment I was referring too

I get not wanting to federate with specific instances but the way this works is to just automatically make it one way only unless the person using their fork manually changes it.

This comment implies that admins need to create a fork to modify the federation list. This is incorrect, it's a configuration change.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)
  1. It is just a configuration change for the administrator of a specific instance. But if somebody wanted to make politics-free pie feed as a fork of the project, without the opinionated block list, but otherwise following the original project. That would be totally appropriate.

For instance I use pipe pipe which is a fork of new pipe plus sponsor block, because the new pipe developers decided sponsor block wasn't good philosophically

If new pipe gets an update, pipe pipe updates, and it rolls through a couple hours later. No big deal.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Indeed, I agree with what you are saying, but the quoted comment is still incorrect. A fork is not required to change the configuration of the federation list.

A fork could be made later following what you just said, but that's not what was being said in the quoted comment.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I have no interest in debating your quoted comment from above. I'm as an individual saying a fork makes sense to get around the strong political opinions of the developer.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago

All good then, see you around