this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2026
40 points (97.6% liked)

PieFed Meta

4771 readers
66 users here now

Discuss PieFed project direction, provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics.

Wiki

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
rimu@piefed.social
40
Improvement for the vote quota implementation (cake.kobel.fyi)
submitted 3 days ago by squirrel@cake.kobel.fyi to c/piefed_meta@piefed.social
50 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

After a couple days of discussions about the newly implemented vote quota, I'm kinda exhausted. It seems like a situation we won't ever agree on. Me personally, I don't want to argue like this over a piece of software that I have high regards for. It tears us apart, where we should work together.

It's okay if there is a quota on piefed.social the instance.
It's not okay if there is a default quota of 240 on PieFed the software - and thus for all instances.

I suggest it should be implemented like this:

  • It should not be a default value
  • It should be an empty input in the admin interface, where instance admins can set a vote quota if they want to, or leave it empty to disable the vote quota.
  • The /about page should display the set vote quota.

That way all instances can decide for themselves and users can see the instances' vote quota transparently.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] IcedRaktajino@startrek.website 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

I read through some other links you dropped in another post and, yeah, there's a good idea in there somewhere but it seems like it would be better handled case-by-case if vote manipulation is suspected.

I'm also not really buying the "These accounts control what you see" argument, especially given how many people simply browse by "new" where the score doesn't matter for ranking at all. I don't say that to suggest an ulterior motive, but simply that the problem seems blown way out of proportion and the solution feels poorly thought out and hamfisted.

[–] univers3man@piefed.world 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I agree with you, and I think this change, and especially making it opt out instead of opt in, is just blatant vote manipulation and is actively making me not want to be here. I will likely migrate back to Lemmy since at least I can upvote and downvote without shady limits.

I really liked Piefed, but I just cannot support this. If the developers want to control what I see, then I'm out. There are other ways to solve this if they think there is BOTing, but even Rimu admits they don't think it's users with BOTs. Plus, I also sort by new like you mention, so other people voting doesn't even affect me or my feed.

I can't tell if this is a well-meaning, but badly implemented idea, or if this is a grudge against the most active members of our communities, but I can't just assume the best anymore.

[–] Vicinus@piefed.zip 2 points 1 day ago

Just an FYI if you want to stay on piefed, .zip has removed the limit and generally the admins are great :)