I guess one thing I like already is that there’s no requirements for Karma, stupid rules about Reddit’s filters which got my 100k karma account permanently banned for no reason at all.
Would you prefer Lemmy to be smaller like it is now or get to a reddit level popularity but without the reddit jank.
This is unpopular but I’d like to see LESS niche communities. I dont want to see 1000 game communities I want to see one game community where all the people are making threads about the games they like. When its big enough then that game can split into its own community.
Because i may not go out of my way to find a community like guild wars 1 but if I see a post about it in the games community I’d join in. The interest isnt always there it needs to be created sometimes. And it can be created by people seeing threads of interested people talking about their interest.
Yes, thank you! This is a big mistake that I’ve seen new online communities make since at least the beginning of the internet. I first saw it with the old forums. Start a forum site for subject X, create sub-forums x1 through x57 for every possible subtopic, no matter how minor or niche. Go into most of those subforums, you only hear crickets. To encourage activity, most subjects should be concentrated in few forums at first, until those forums become too busy. Only at that time is it a good idea to split into subforums.
Some Lemmy sites have had the correct idea, where they don’t allow users to create communities. There should be a process where admins manage whether it makes sense to create communities after evaluating requests. Unfortunately, the decentralized nature of Lemmy makes this difficult to control, because as soon as one instance does this, someone wanting to create a new community will just move to another instance that allows it. I’m not sure if there is a solution to this.
How about community taxonomy?
Say there’s a gaming community.
Then there’s a PC gaming community, then a MMO game community, and there’s communities for individual games subdivided into that.
So if you’re in /c/PCgaming, posts in /c/GuildWars will (by default) show up in your feed.
If you are in /c/GuildWars, you (by default) get the hyper focus, and exposure from your post filtering up to more general tiers.
But this sharing is toggleable too. For example, you could choose to only float it up to the “MMO” level without drawing in the /c/gaming crowd
And this structure kinda naturally fits underlying database structures anyway.
Reddit could not evolve like this, but now that we kinda know what niches exist, that could be constructed from scratch and maintained.
Yeah I like that idea its a good solution.
I think this is an awesome idea! It would allow people to have the freedom to create any community they wanted, but still keep posts concentrated enough for visitors to see activity they can participate in. Excellent, maybe you could propose this to the developers of Lemmy and Piefed? Is Mbin still being actively developed?
I’ll make an issue in Piefed for sure! Probably Lemmy too.
I’m still thinking some things through for an initial post. For instance, how would moderation work? What level of control do the ‘higher’ community have over the lower one? Can mods ban posts, or throw the community out entirely? Or are they limited to simply hiding the lower community’s posts a la carte? Should they be able to hide the lower community without banning it?
…And is there any granularity for how that filters down the chain? For example, could /c/MMO be hidden in /c/PCgaming while allowing /c/GuildWars?
How does the integration start? Does it require approval from the “higher” community mods to join a taxonomical hierarchy?
…Can there be multiple parent communities, or max of 1?
Are there federation specific quirks? I’m assuming these hierarchies all have to exist in one server, but would it be technically feasible to have cross-server hierarchies?
And there’s a lot of conflicting incentives there. For instance, you don’t want to give too much power for a bot or troll to infiltrate a community via a subcommunity.
On the other hand, the fear of power-trippin’ mods may discourage linking under another community, so you want to give the subcommunities sufficient autonomy as well. I’m leaning to configurable defaults of:
subcommunity requires permission from the one directly above, but not the whole chain
all higher communities have the power to hide posts, hide “bottom tiers,” or even completely hide specific subcommunities by default, but logged in community users can opt to show them
each community controls their own moderation unless they opt-in to accept moderation from higher ones
higher ones can post rules required to accept the lower one, but once accepted, this is static text, unless all parties agree to change it
lower communities can be kicked out. Or they can opt to leave the hierarchy system, and rejoin another
lower users are not auto subscribed to higher ones by default, but this can be configured so, say /c/GuildWars auto subscribes you to /c/GuildWarsScenery
Fizz@lemmy.nz you may be interested in this too.
Those are all good questions. I’m inclined to think that keeping this as simple as possible and following similar principles to the existing moderation environment would help make this useful while not creating too much extra work for moderators or admins, as both groups already seem overworked. I think this will already be complicated enough to begin with (for instance, how will communities in other instances be handled?) and fraught with potential for conflicts (for instance, include or not include communities of certain political slants?), so care should be taken to keep this somewhat minimalistic.
With that in mind, here are some possible concepts to consider:
Moderation: following the principle that Lemmy/Piefed allows moderation by users (through blocking users, communities, and instances), community mods (through removing posts and banning users), and instance admins (through overseeing mods and defederating or default blocking other instances), in that order, how about if the users themselves were the first (and perhaps only) ones to decide and control which lower-level communities they want to see structured in their feed and how? It seems to me that community mods should only be able to moderate their own community at each level, and not be able to moderate posts from levels below.
Creation and use of taxonomies: should the creation of the taxonomy be the job of users, community mods, or instance admins? I’m inclined to think that this should also ultimately be left to users to determine, but there could be a mechanism that allows anyone to share/publish a taxonomy that they find useful (or perhaps branches of a taxonomy, like Gaming), and allow other users to either import or subscribe the taxonomy or branches that they like, from a list of different available ones that have been shared/published. Admins could then have the option of setting entire taxonomies or a group of branches as defaults for users of their instances. This would allow users the freedom to create the structure that they would like to see while also allowing others to benefit from that work and not have to duplicate it, and finally also allowing for different competing structures to exist. Community mods could informally ask creators/maintainers of taxonomies or branches to include their communities in that structure. To add communities to a structure, there could be a simple button in each community that said something like “add to structure”.
I think that doing things this way would allow the most freedom, flexibility, and utility, while also minimizing additional work for mods and admins, as well as any potential for conflicts. Another factor to consider would be how much impact would this kind of thing have on resource utilization of instances?
I hope this all makes sense and helps provide some ideas for how this could work.
Ah, see that’s what I’m also trying to work around.
I don’t want “make-your-own-multicommunities.” Reddit has that, it doesn’t help with small-sub exposrue, and I’m not interested in using it myself. Fact is, most defaults stay as defaults, so if the goal is to drive exposure to lower subs, users having to opt in to see organized communities is not going to do that.
While this is a neat idea, I think requiring admin confirmation is too much work for them. Especially as lower levels shuffle around: think of all the new games rolling under the ‘gaming’ heirarchy, for instance. Admins can’t deal with updates by-the-minute.
Similarly, operating as a ‘sea’ of user suggested heirarchies is just going to be massively fragmented, quickly get out of date, and so on. Take the gaming example again: say an admin adopts a ‘user’ preset… Who’s job is it to maintain it? Who’s gonna track all the new games that come out to try and group them sanely? Even if the user does, what if they leave?
I think its better for community creators to shoulder the load of finding a place in the tree, as they’re the one with the passion, expertise, and motivation in their niche to slot it where they want.
I’m also very wary of ‘recommendation’ subsystems like Reddit has bloated their site with. I don’t want lists of auto-suggested heirarchies belpw my community view, I want some sane structure there transparently, to the point that the Lemmy/Piefed user UI requires close to zero changes.
…Hence, it’d be nice if users could organize taxonomies however they want for viewing (which is a lot of software work on its own), but having a sane default taxonomy is extremly important.
Mind you, I am thinking out loud here.
I can understand that. I didn’t realize that Reddit had that feature. I totally hear you that defaults stay defaults.
I may not have been very clear, but what I meant was that users would be able to create and share their own structures without approval or interaction from admins or mods, then admins would be able to pick and choose from those structures that users created and shared, and then the admins would have the option to make those structures the defaults for their instances if they wished.
However, I can see that having this kind of sharing structure could get pretty messy with tons of different structures around. I can also see that the structures could get outdated quickly. I also agree with you that it would probably be better for community creators/mods to self-organize with other communities to structure this.
I think you’re probably right in your approach, but like I said before, it would benefit from being as simple as possible. Perhaps it would be the best to break down your ideas into smaller sets of features so they can be implemented in phases, or maybe even eliminate some features?
Like, for instance, why have permissions, hiding, or cross-community moderation? Why not simplify it to its most basic level: allow two communities to be linked with each other (at the request of either and agreement from the other for them to be in a specific hierarchy) and allow either community to rescind that linkage at any time? This link would make it so that users who subscribe to the “supercommunity” would also get all posts from any “subcommunities” (unless the same user has blocked any particular “subcommunity”, in which case they would still not see that sub’s posts). I think that just these two features would implement most of what I think we would both like to see, while being straight-forward. This could even be thought of as similar to a type of inter-community federation.
I’m thinking out loud too. :)
As a whole, Lemmy isn’t really big enough to branch out into individual game communities just yet. They just end up petering out.
I wouldn’t be against it since r/games is used for mainly game announcements and r/gaming is a facebook tier cesspool. I wouldn’t mind a community like that.