I've been one of the people saying "we don't need more users. we need quality over quantity" and i was wrong.
the way it's going, lemmy needs active users who post content sothat the network stays relevant. networks like the fediverse benefit from network effects and that means that if we have more users, that improves the value and quality of the fediverse overall.
So please, everyone, when you can, make advertisement for the fediverse in your personal area. Go talk to friends, make attractive stickers and put them everywhere, stuff like that. We would all benefit from it.
edit: source for the graph
Sorry to resurrect this old issue but @robottoaster@mander.xyz and I were discussing after that other thread got locked (likewise tagging @blaze@piefed.zip for relevance in feedback), and we realized that a wording choice may be leading to confusion for people.
The page at https://piefed.zip/auth/instance_chooser where it says "Defederation: Negligent" was leading @robottoaster@mander.xyz to believe that a critical judgement had been rendered against PieFed.zip by virtue of it not having defederated from certain well-known "disliked" instances. Rimu indeed can be quite strong in his dislike of certain things - communities, post types, and the like.
So instead I recommend the word "Negligible" rather than "Negligent", since PieFed.zip counts it a point of pride to be "a general instance open to anyone!", and its lack of defederation from most instances is a positive, not a deficiency as the word "Negligent" would suggest.
I just thought that I would pass that thought along, in case it helps avoid future misunderstandings, and help entice people to try out PieFed.zip!:-)
Shouldn't the Negligible term be changed in the Piefed software? @rimu@piefed.social
Yes, it was changed to 'None' in v1.6.0. A change too minor to mention in the release notes.
@OpenStars@piefed.social
Yeah, there was confusion (and accusations I was spreading misinformation) because zip is still running 1.6.0-dev, with the old wording. While the new wording on .social running 1.6.1 seems like a needed improvement.
Great, thank you!