You think that if I paid you to remove features, you'd do it?
rglullis
joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
On the other hand, I'm see newcommunities being flooded with posts from piefed.social and thinking the following:
- If this becomes an automatic thing, I'd be less inclined to subscribe to the community.
- How is concentration around piefed.social any different from concentration around LW?
It's funny to see these contrasting approaches between PieFed and Lemmy development.
Rimu just treats this is a hobby and goes ahead yolo'ing a bunch of these features that abuse the underlying protocol and could bring serious systemic risks if other admins start deploying it, but because the current userbase is small then there is little scrutiny and they all think it's good to go.
The Lemmy devs are trying for years to get enough support to make a living of their work and therefore a lot more "professional" about what they do, so they would never introduce a feature that could cause Lemmy to be a "bad participant" in the network. But by not taking a more "customer-focused" approach to product development, it takes a long time to bring any functionality that makes it attractive.
PieFed is definitely taking a "Worse is Better" approach and I don't know what to make of it. It seems to be poised to make it most popular software among the current fediverse users, but at the same time it makes so idiosyncratic decisions that it makes it hard to believe it will be usable if more people started joining in.
Wait, so the posts that are showing up on !newcommunities@lemmy.world are not really initiated by the user, but just the piefed server creating a post and impersonating the user that created the community?
@rimu@piefed.social, if I'm understanding this correctly, it's the second feature (the first one being the import of communities) where you have the server initiating actions but misrepresenting the true actor.
Great, that's exactly what we need in alternative social media: more reasons for people to be angry at the world and those who do not 100% subscribe to our own limited point of view.
There is !bundesliga@soccer.forum, which has been neglected but I could certainly help if I see anyone taking initiative with the posting.
Just reposted it on !newcommunities@lemmy.world because why not
Does this mean you won't mind me posting the communities from the topic-specific instances, even if they are not exactly new?
Maybe we should introduce a gated API and charge $12 for 50k requests...
Not sure if there's a legit use for just fetching only comments outside of a post
The ability to see all comments is right there at the Lemmy UI.
you never said it.
The whole conversation started with me talking about Communick offering a subscription service. Communick is my business. I thought that was clear. My bad if it wasn't.
"Hey, I run a business, something like this would probably cost X per year and I think I would have Y users. Which would mean I'd minimally have to charge Z to make this viable"
That's not a good approach, because Y changes depending on the price point and X changes on what these Y customers would expect from the service.
The only variable that can be fixed here is "how much you are willing to pay", so this is why I am asking it.
In case you didn't notice, I have a hosting business. This is why I'm "obsessed" in figuring out how much someone would pay for it, if they were serious about what they are asking.
By asking you "how much would you pay?", I'm trying to gauge how serious you are about it. Your refusal to go ahead and name any amount for something that you said "I'd pay for that" shows me that you are not serious about it and therefore a bad idea.
Wouldn't you agree that hardcoding one specific community to provide a feature to "try it and see it causes any problems" is yolo'ing?
In my view, the "proper" solution to this (and that would fit right into ActivityPub) would be simply to let the actor that represents the server to post "as:Create" for any new communities that are created and then let the other software follow these if they are interested.
It certainly would be a lot more work and it would still require others to write code on their end to look for this information, but seems like the only implementation that would seem like just another ad-hoc hack.