• rglullisA
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        https://chat.piefed.social/#narrow/channel/4-developers/topic/Lemmyverse.20Community.20Discovery/near/4966

        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.

        • Blaze (he/him)@lemmy.zipOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          There is a checkbox in the communicaty creation menu that allows you to indeed create a post on !newcommunities at creation

          • rglullisA
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            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.

              • rglullisA
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 days ago

                You think that if I paid you to remove features, you’d do it?

                • Rimu@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  7 days ago

                  No, but if I was paid it wouldn’t be a hobby.

                  Before launching the feature I checked with the mod of that community to see if they were ok with it. We agreed to try it and see if it caused any problems. If it does I’ll point the code at a different community instead, possibly a PieFed one.

                  If that is still a problem then I’ll code something to spread communities to other instances using an API but that seems like a lot more work.

                  • rglullisA
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    7 days ago

                    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?

                    I’ll code something to spread communities to other instances using an API but that seems like a lot more work.

                    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.

            • Blaze (he/him)@lemmy.zipOPM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 days ago

              that there is a point where less functionality (“worse”) is a preferable option (“better”) in terms of practicality and usability.

              Seems accurate. This example is a good one: if you create a community and want it to succeed, you are going to promote it on !newcommunities@lemmy.world. Or maybe you aren’t aware of !newcommunities, because you are a now mod, but then it’s still useful to have that there.

              • rglullisA
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 days ago

                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?
                • Blaze (he/him)@lemmy.zipOPM
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 days ago

                  If this becomes an automatic thing, I’d be less inclined to subscribe to the community.

                  Well, sure, but that’s still the most active community on that topic. And I know because I’ve been trying to push for !communitypromo@lemmy.ca for years, without success.

                  How is concentration around piefed.social any different from concentration around LW?

                  The feature is available for any Piefed instance, there are currently 13 with more than 10 monthly active users: https://piefed.fediverse.observer/list

                  Edit: also, Piefed has an instance chooser, if you click on Register, you end up on this page: https://piefed.zip/auth/instance_chooser

      • Otter@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        Oh nice! I haven’t had a chance to explore the new features yet. While I wouldn’t want to change it for piefed.ca, it might be nice in the future if instances were able to customize which community it uses. For the users/instances that block LW/that community

        • Blaze (he/him)@lemmy.zipOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          Indeed. Down the line, hopefully we won’t rely on a community but rather on raw data from instances themselves, the current setup is quite of a workaround