Fortunately AI is taking care of that on its own https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07566-y

Google will never rank fediverse posts high. Said otherwise, the external incentives are not there either.

There are cooperatives and I haven’t seen any of them so such spamming. The fediverse is an example of it too.

Yet you didn’t respond to the point that makes the difference:

reddit is actively encouraging this kind behaviour to inflate their user statistics and there is no incentive to tolerate this kind of spam for a fediverse server admin

It showed up now, so I guess it was a matter of synchronisation (9 hours is a lot of time). Probably also has to do with the fact that there’s low usage, so few “pull” attempts. I’m not very clear on what are the triggers.

Anyway, your feedback is very useful and now I know that I should be able to see traces in the container logs of lemmy backend.

Well, having an illustrated web page where it is simply explained how mastodon users can use lemmy as the equivalent of facebook groups would also give us pretty good exposure. Most mastodon users don’t know the difference between mastodon and the fediverse.

Sure, these are two very different usability paradigms, but I think they are very well integrated by treating both groups and users on Lemmy as users on Mastodon. Mastodon and Lemmy are the vanilla examples, but a.gup.pe and mbin in show that the two coexist quite smoothly. It is “only” a question of how to map this onto BridgyFed.

How about bridging over to bluesky? If they could follow and comment threads, the userbase explodes 10-fold (compared to the current exposure to mastodon).

See this thread: https://github.com/snarfed/bridgy-fed/issues/372

I see lemmy as groups for mastodon. It has the same affordances as a.gup.pe did.

I’ve gone through a similar experience with two instances. Eventually they both approved. It just took them ages. Of course I needed only one.

There’s UFoI, but to my understanding that’s only helpful in cases of litigations related to federation.

I’d like to point out that in !techtakes@awful.systems they have a rule saying:

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

which they use to wolfpack onto anyone who even remotely questions their tribal consensus, even if that person is coming from sharing a post that is well aligned with them.

Lemmy is wild indeed.

I hope one day the Lemmy developers arrive at the idea that a person could be a community, somewhat like the way Mastodon treats communities as users. It’s a confusing generalisation, but it works.

Ah, I see, so you are talking about this.

Of course it is nice if things get auto-generated, but doing it yourself, both in code and documentation should never be excluded as an option.

Could you elaborate on this:

it’s not really possible to document and validate that an endpoint needs to have at least one of something

In what sense it is not possible, as I can easily see it done in the code?

thank you!

Do you have more information on how it supports crossposting with Mastodon? As far as I know, Friendica supports its protocol, but that’s about it.

Unfortunately Diaspora does not use the ActivityPub protocol and doesn’t even bridge to it. They have made the deliberate choice to not ever have a sizeable community.

https://github.com/CitizensFoundation/your-priorities-app/issues/161

It’s not a straightforward task. And it’s controversial is you want to avoid multiple registrations.

It’s been around for many years now and famously was used in the consultations for the constitution of Iceland. We also used it in Bulgaria back in 2013 and had a community of more than 3000 users, but it lost traction due to being ignored by politicians and controversial debates.

You can see more recent activity on https://www.citizens.is/ , particularly the impact and news sections.