The following communities have already an alternative on instances that I run:
All these instances have been running for close to two years and are part of the “topic-specific” network of servers that I set up to help during the migration.
To be completely honest, my dislike of AP server software is not restricted to PieFed. I think all of them are an evolutionary dead end and I wish we stopped wasting our time trying to emulate closed social networks.
So what’s the point of voting since we don’t know its reasons ?
Don’t overcomplicate this. Voting is a way to collectively curate content. If it is relevant to the community and you feel the content is a positive addition to the community, you vote up. If you think it’s a negative addition, you vote it down. That’s all that there is to it.
that people prefer to post on other instances than yours.
This again?
Even if I had never created any of the topic-specific instances and I all I had was Communick as an user instance. How many instances have we both seem go down? How many admins have you seen showing up full of enthusiasm to burn out some months/years later? Why is it that my manage to keep my (few) users satisfied with the service? Why is it that I don’t feel overworked?
I’m not talking with other “people”. I’m talking with you. You raised every possible objection against what I am doing. Yet, it keeps growing. Slower than I’d hoped, but growing. It has been self-sustaining. But you continue to look for ways to discredit me.
There have been discussions about how to implement this before. But it has to be done in a way that is agreed by other threadiverse software.
I think we should move away from “threadiverse software” and embrace a transparent social web.
If we want to be transparent, we need to stop creating these leaky abstractions. Votes are not private. A vote on Lemmy is just a Like, a downvote is just a dislike. Instead of pretending this information should be private, we should make it clear to the users that they should only react in anyway if they feel comfortable in sharing their opinion in public.
It qualifies as activity. People are posting when it matters to them.
It still is unrelated to the point. The point is that you keep betting on donation-based instances because you want them to succeed, yet history is (repeatedly) showing it to you that these bets are not good.
Flag activity, etc.I am not saying they have bad intentions. I am just saying that they prefer to develop things that work for them first and for the rest of the Fediverse second.
And healthy.community and viewfinder.pro are getting activity from other people who are just focused on doing their thing. What does this have to do with the overall point?
How the future of feddit will be?
I don’t know what it will be, but I hope that it becomes less about “instances” and servers and it becomes more a proper web of independent applications that share the social graph.
Piefed also has this Mastodon-esque tendency to implement features that only work on their system and are not interoperable with the rest of the ActivityPub software. Which is the kind of thing that is only “nice” until they are a minority player, but could make them one of the most hated systems if they start getting significant users.
Most people don’t pay for services on the Internet
Yeah, but we are not “most people”. I thought “we” understood if you are not paying for the product, then you are the product. I thought “we” understood that “Free software” was not a “free lunch”.
And if basic talk and text service was freely provided by volunteers, they’d milk those volunteer organizations dry, too.
This is also why I think we should flip the script and stop cheering admins that run “free” instances. We should stop helping admins who can not make rent and we should start telling them to start valuing their work and demand proper compensation.
It’s too big to be a hobby, and too small to be a job.
Facebook allegedly extracts $14/month of value from each of their US-based users, ~$12/european user, $7/month for Latin America and $4 from Southeast Asia.
If each active user contributed $1/month for their instance and $1/month for the developer of the software they use, the Mastodon developers would have an operational budget of ~$800k per month, the Lemmy developers would have $50k/month.
I don’t think that the problem is we’re “too small to be a job”. I think that the problem is that the average “enthusiast” is an hypocrite. They will profess their hatred of the business practices of Big Tech, but they will look for any and every possible justification to excuse themselves to contributing to the pool.
We have tens of thousands of people who (…) are mostly interested in consuming, not fighting for attention.
Sure, but what I don’t get is this: why is that people are absolutely fine with paying 10-20€/month (or $50-$70/month in the US) for their mobile phone service but expect that the server hosting service and software development service to fall from the sky?
You brought hypothetical scenarios. I was just pointing out a fact: the second largest Lemmy instance is going under and taking with it all the communities that were created there.
At one time I thought community spirit (for what that’s worth) would kind of tilt things in a long-term sustainable direction.
Community is not enough. I wrote that in 2022 with Twitter and Mastodon in mind, but the same principle still applies for Reddit vs Lemmy.
Lots of people say they want to “stick it to the man” but very few are actually going to put in the work and/or money required to actually succeed.
One scenario is hypothetical. The other really happened. It makes no sense to say “they are both true”.
That was available to the lemm.ee admins in our scenario as well.
It is a lot more difficult to get out of burn out than it is to avoid getting there in the first place.
They still shut down the instance.
Only the users on lemm.ee are affected by it, in this scenario. It is bad, but the current scenario is much worse.
Drama still happens involving lemm.ee users.
User-only instances are less dependent on each other, defederation is not as big of an issue, so a lot of the drama would go away.
Admins still get burnt out.
Less communities on their instances means less traffic, less activities, less moderation reports (they would have to deal only with users on their own instances) and if even then they are overloaded with work, they could decide to scale down the operation before reaching burning-out point: close the instance for new registrations, make user registration conditional on payment/donation, etc.
This argument applies more to “instance with lots of users and groups” (what we have now) than “communities with lots of users on topic-specific instances”, so I don’t think this is the problem here.
We can not change “human behavior”, so I don’t see how/why we should expect things to “be different at .ee” compared to anywhere else.
Should I add an entry for metacritics or should you?