This can be turned off by instance admins who would see this in their settings. I agree maybe a public-facing form here could be of use though.
This can be turned off by instance admins who would see this in their settings. I agree maybe a public-facing form here could be of use though.
anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
There’s nothing in the code that I can see that indicates that any of the penalties are undone by turning off the filter - but that’s kind of the point. They’ve introduced a new metric that thumbs the scale of content visibility that’s hard-coded and inscrutable to everyone but those with knowledge of the codebase, and that makes the entire project and the devs who made those choices un-trustable.
Is there a version of their reputation system that’s less objectionable? Sure. But it would need to be exceedingly transparent with clear documentation on how to configure, alter, and revert if there’s a mistake made. But there’s nothing here that indicates the devs of piefed are willing or capable of transparency or even just clear documentation.
Skavau@piefed.social 2 days ago
Have you or anyone attempted to ask rimu about this? I don’t ever recall any piefed instance owner asking this.
He has already altered or rolled back a ton of functions due to scrutiny.
anarchiddy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
I’m not collaborating with a developer who has it out for the platform I’m working to improve. If he wants to fix the shit he broke, he can.
Skavau@piefed.social 2 days ago
Then I don’t know what you expect. He does respond to criticism.