A number of brand new accounts have popped up shilling their paid for applications.
Is this within the rules? Is the community happy with this? Could mods clarify this in the rules?
Either allowing advertising, or banning it entirely.
my point is - there is a difference between an open source homegrown project that might be useful, vs closed source paid for projects from brand new accounts
some replies are misunderstanding, somehow.
I am against
brand new accounts who:
- first post is a brand new project
- project is closed source
- project will cost money
- is asking for free testing
- the post is literally an advertisement
if they are obviously bot or dedicated marketing accounts, then no I dont think they should be here.
However, I’m not 100% opposed to closed source/paid software being discussed here, but it should clearly marked as such, with a flair that people can filter out if they so choose.
If someone posts asking about whether there are any alternatives to a paid closed source program, that’s a totally valid conversation, and if it turns out there is no FOSS alternative, then we have to talk about paid closed alternatives, find the one that offers the best value and vet for trustworthiness.
The rules say nothing about selling a paid service, but maybe “no spam” should be updated with some clarity on self promotion, so perhaps you can self promote your FOSS service with the appropriate flair, but if you are selling a paid closed service it shouldn’t be allowed?
discussing a product is not the same as someone literally advertising their paid for product.
are you ok with advertising on this community?
I’m here for genuine interactions with other people. So I’m not a fan of ads from brand new accounts that will never engage with the community or enrich it.
I don’t think “selfhosting” and “paid for” goes hand in hand because, at the end of the day, the application somehow will still contact some authentication server or some similar bullshit. That’s the contrary of what most people want from selfhosting.
I think this community should stick to actual OSS, free applications, not some semi-corporate bullshit.
I think new accounts that show up to shil their app should be banned. They’re not actively participating in the community, it’s just spam. There’s been a huge uptick recently.
I think new accounts that show up to shil their app should be banned.
What if the new account user, who is working on a product that integrates with what the vast majority of selfhosters run, just found Lemmy? Lemmy selfhosted doesn’t exactly share the same popularity as say Reddit. It doesn’t just roll off the tongue. I had to vigorously try to find Lemmy before I got here.
That sounds like you’re describing someone who is only making a lemmy account because they see potential customers they want to advertise to.
That’s the exact reason I don’t want someone to make a lemmy account.
“Lurk for a while before posting,” has been a standard rule of netiquette for at least the 30 years that I’ve been using the 'net.
I would tend to agree with that. Maybe OP didn’t think of that.
They did think about that, apparently you did not. Did you not see that they specifically said “brand new” accounts? Or are you talking about the most recent OP that posted an ad to beta test closed source software?
If all they have to contribute is self promotion I think they should be banned.
They should hang out a while first and not have only posts promoting their software, and not only have comments in those threads.
The lemmy attitude is very anti commercialization, and they don’t know any better. That doesn’t mean we should allow it.
They should hang out a while first and not have only posts promoting their software, and not only have comments in those threads.
I tend to agree.
The lemmy attitude is very anti commercialization
The lemmy attitude is like chaff in the wind.
You can start with timed bans, so they get the point
are they charging? is it open source?
They aren’t charging you. The OP/DEV in question is willing to give their product away. A product that integrates with your opensource *arr stack. All he wanted to know is, 'Would you be interested in beta testing it?"
I mean, there was recently a new user here who intro’d himself as a Windows selfhoster. He was pretty much welcomed with open arms, with a few snarky remarks, but welcomed. How much more closed source could you get than Microsoft Windows? What’s is the actual difference here?
Lmao, the OP you’re talking about literally said that “It’s a paid closed source app”. Why are you not mentioning that little tidbid?
“It’s a paid closed source app”. Why are you not mentioning that little tidbid?
I assumed everyone has a decent reading skills?
that is incredibly misleading.
its not someone asking advice about a closed source app. its someone shilling their own paid for product.
why are you ok with advertising for paid for products being shoved down your throat?
they arent “willing to give it away”. theyre willing to give it to testers for free labour to test their paid for app.
why are you ok with advertising for paid for products being shoved down your throat?
No one, not one living soul that has graced the halls of Lemmy selfhosted since I’ve been here has shoved anything down anyone’s throat. Are you not master of your own domain? Do you not possess self control? Additionally, I chart my own course. I don’t let hive mind tell me what I can and can’t selfhost or use in relation to my server.
they arent “willing to give it away”. theyre willing to give it to testers for free labour to test their paid for app.
So, to recap, they’re going to give their app, which is closed source but integrates with what most selfhosters host, to beta testers, who are interested, and in return, the beta testers get to keep the app for free. I see no free labor.
It was said when rule 3 was being discussed, that there are so few selfhosters out here, why gatekeep?
Yes, but all of your comments seem to miss the fact that this post is talking about paid software. Which is what the OP you’re talking about and defending did. You also said “they aren’t charging you”, which might be true for now, but they will make money off of beta tester’s free labor.
but they will make money off of beta tester’s free labor.
That’s exactly how beta testing works. I’ve mentioned, I do a lot of beta testing for BetaBound. I’m currently beta testing a rumba floor sweeper knock off. WHen I’m done, the company says ‘thank you’ by letting me keep the rather pricey product. Are they going to make money? Of course they will. That’s why they started business…to make money.
I don’t want this community, or any community on Lemmy for that matter, to become a lucrative platform for advertisers. If someone wants to promote their own product that they made, they should have some credibility as a real person beforehand. Not a brand-new account trying to sell a subscription to an app that’s essentially still in open beta.
At it’s heart, this is what @selfhosted is meant for:
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don’t control.
I would say that members talking about paid/closed products they use (ex. “I connect to this via Tailscale” or “I use company ABC for hosted VPS”) to accomplish something is fine, but marketing or job boarding (ex. “Looking for QA on my commercial product”) is not.
If their first interaction with a community is to try to sell their shit, i don’t think they’re gonna be welcome anywhere
Advertised? I’d vote no. Discussed? I’m all for it.
Eh, that may just promote a lot of “What are your opinions about x” posts where the first comment is the ad. Suppose it’s an open call to list alternatives though.
Should be a mod decision, but posters should be community participants/contributors.
On reddit, there is a community called r/progressionfantasy, which is about a specific type of fantasy fiction. They have a rule that self promotional posts (for paid books) must be preceeded by 10 comments, and actual engagement with the community.
This is a reasonable compromise, in my opinion. Known community member who has been answering questions and contributiting to discussions?
I would be okay if they dropped a paid product of good quality and with a reasonable business model (please no vibecoded slop).
But drive by ProductNameAccount users who have never posted on lemmy before a bunch of self promotional posts? Yeah ban that shit.
With the advent of AI bots trying to flood into Lemmy communities, I don’t really see this as a viable option on the long run.
If it’s closed source but can be self hosted, what is the business model? I think it would be hard to fight piracy in that case. If it requires connecting to a service periodically for licenses and has no free version that doesn’t require that, then I believe it should be banned. I don’t consider that self-hosted. If the company disappears and the served goes down, its dead. That’s just running on your hardware, but not under your control. If the application is open or can be run locally without connecting to their servers and the paid portion is an add on like working as a proxy or something, then I have no real issue with that.
That said, there definitely should be a higher standard for users who are only marketing here. They should be making posts specifically for this group, not just sharing generic ads. The post should specifically state why it’s useful to self-hosters and thus relevant to the group.
Unraid is an example, that I consider fairly reasonable. Sure, it is a subscription.
But all of the services are docker containers. What unraid brings to the table is a nice management UI, and the ability to mix and match drive of different sizes in a single raid pool. It makes having a fairly resilient self hosting setup easier than trying to do all of this stuff from scratch.
Nice features sure, that many people find worth paying for, even if I don’t. But they are just nice to haves. If the company ever dies, it’s absolutely possible to export the data and move to say, portainer, or docker via the cli, or podman, or anything that can run containers.
I selfhost because I want to be in control of my data and own it. Closed software is the antithesis of that. They’re just bots trying to advertise their software.
I want to be in control of my data and own it. Closed software is the antithesis of that
So, please do share how your homelab has indexed the entire global internet, so you can use your 100% selfhosted, 100% open source search engine? I’m very interested. I’ve always wanted to run a search engine that is not tied to someone else’s.
That’s a petty troll response to a legitimate statement of what someone wants (which aligns with this group’s stated focus), where they aren’t claiming what they have done
It’s not trolling at all. You stated you got into self hosting because you wanted opensource and you want to retain all of your data. I’m asking you to share your homelab set up. A lot of people would be genuinely interested. The point being, all the gnashing of teeth is a duplicitous argument. If you truly do as you stated, then I’m wondering how you search a global internet from your homelab that indexes it all.
Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. You’re sealioning this guy about his self-hosting setup and implying that we must freely accept all closed source and closed data in all areas simply because the “search” you seem to have rhetorically fixated on doesn’t have a fully independent open source implementation?
That’s a disingenuous argument, and you’re absolutely trolling. With all due respect: shut the fuck up.
With all due respect: shut the fuck up.
How about you roll that up real tight and gently guide it into your mum’s cunt and fuck her with it.
Thanks for letting me and everyone else know you’re childish and stupid enough to be worth blocking.
Kind for kind.
reverts to personal attacks
good job friend. very grown up
Don’t tell me to shut the fuck up if you aren’t willing to hear a very blunt retort.
It’s not trolling at all
Sigh… As always, life must be balanced. You can’t go from one extreme to the other. It’s a spectrum. I self-host what I deem important in order to keep it under my control and not on a capitalist platform.
It’s an adventure, each month, you learn more and realize that you can host more services yourself.
I self-host what I deem important in order to keep it under my control and not on a capitalist platform.
And I applaud you for that. However, the fact remains, that not everyone selfhosts for the same reasons. I got into selfhosting because I wanted to be as private, as secure, and as anonymous as I could be. However, I do thoroughly enjoy learning how to do things on my server. At my age, it’s good to keep what’s left of my brain active. I genuinely like to tinker. I do also make concessions.
I looked at the rules, and I can’t find anything about closed source. I did find ‘without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don’t control.’ The reason this thread exists is because some people think closed source that integrates with selfhosted, opensource, is 100% out, and I find no evidence of such. It also states ‘Be civil: we’re here to support and learn from one another. Insults won’t be tolerated.’ Civility: Hey is this open source? Was it vibe coded? Ok no thanks bro.’ It sure isn’t the dog pile on the rabbit we see most of the time here when something AI, paid for, or closed source that integrates with opensource threads show up.
I agree that 100% asking selfhosters to outright buy something should be out. We’ve seen a few of these. But, again, the reason this thread was started was because a dev asked a bunch of selfhosters to beta test an app that integrates with what most here run, and in return for your efforts, he will let you keep the app if you so desire. So, you actually do retain control. You can pass. You can beta test. You can uninstall. Your choice.
Self-hosting is a community effort in which the whole community helps each other to self-host their data, including programming the services people use for this purpose. The problem with closed-source software is that we don’t know what’s happening behind the scenes, or if it’s indeed sending telemetry.
Even worse, if that service is ever no longer supported or updated, I’ll be left with data on my server that can’t be used to its full potential, and a service that won’t receive security updates.
Open-source software, on the other hand, is a community effort. If, for example, software is no longer updated or supported, it can easily be forked, and my data can be transferred to the new service.
No advertisement is ever appropriate, period. Advertisements should be banned. I don’t mind a ‘look what I made’ post, but when the post designed to convince me to give you money, I see an immediate conflict of interest that suggests advertisement rather than information. It’s hard to draw that line without knowing intention, so I don’t think those posts should be disallowed, but if your post asks me to click a link to a product so I can give you my money, I’m downvoting.
No. They should not be allowed, especially the closed source, non-FOSS ones. It’d be one thing to have a FOSS application that has a premium option (such as Frigate), but if it’s closed source and you have to pay, they shouldn’t be in the self hosting community.
Even if you change the ROM in your Android phone, guess what? The ROM still relies on closed-source vendor blobs from the manufacturer that come with the stock firmware and most often are required to make your ROM do what it do. I would say that the vast majority of people screaming about closed source and how they own their own data, yadda yadda, yadda, when it gets right down to the brass tacks, somewhere, they rely on something that is not FOSS. It’s a rather duplicitous diatribe.
This logic is not great. I’d rather have something mostly open source (where I can check what blobs it’s actually using) rather than something completely closed where I have no idea what’s under the hood. It’s not about concessions, it’s about being able to tell what the hell software is actually doing.
I’d rather have something mostly open source (where I can check what blobs it’s actually using) rather than something completely closed where I have no idea what’s under the hood
Mee2! However, not everyone here is of a hive mind. Not everyone here got into selfhosting for the same reasons. Like I’ve mentioned, it’s a big umbrella.
That’s not the question that was asked.
The question is if brand new accounts should be able to shill their PAID closed source products without otherwise contributing to the community. They should not be able to do so.
Huh?
So, if we have the choice of something 90% open and 10% closed, versus 100% closed, you’re saying the first option is invalid to even desire, because it isn’t 100% open.
Wow. Just, wow.
So, let me be exactly clear here: WE ALL MAKE CONCESSIONS.
Apparently, some of us are okay making 100% concessions and not giving a shit at all.
Yeah. Selfhosting is a very large umbrella.
Ban advertising!
Advertising can be obvious sometimes. Other times, it’s more subtle.
I think self-hosting has the expectation of the ability to self-host for indefinite period of time. E.g. I can run Jellyfin 10.10 for as long as I have the hardware and willingness to run it. A proprietary piece of software, say Plex, could technically allow that too, but that’s much less likely. Since I can’t see its source code, I can’t know if there’s a time bomb that stops it from working at some future date. Or an update/remote procedure I don’t know about that asks me to pay $750 at some point to continue using it. Which could preclude me from being able to continue self-hosting it. Is the ability to self-host indefinitely an expectation everyone shares? Probably not. Probably worth thinking about in this context though.
