Completely agree, especially on the hardware part. This is also why I mention self-regulation - and there was a recent post that demonstrated it - we are going to interact with posts that are related to self-hosting, and on ones that are questionable, people are going to question then up/downvote accordingly.
I don’t personally see a need for the rule at all.
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus 1 week ago
By the way, not sure what your post was that got removed, if you’d like to let me know I can restore. It won’t get the same attention though since it would be a less recent post, so if its something that still would benefit from discussion, a new post might be better.
I’ll be making a new post about rule 3 probably tomorrow, but especially considering the recent activity, that is not a rule thats going to be enforced the same way.
scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 1 week ago
Nah it’s okay, unless you want to for history and reference. Link
Ironically I had so much help in finding the info before it was removed that all I did was eyeroll at it’s removal. Will be looking forward to the update!
Bringing in both your threads, I agree. With only a handful of active communities, saying “this isn’t the right one” without pointing to an active community where it is a good one seems… destructive. Personally, if no hardware remains a rule, then it seems natural to then start a sister community which is hardware focused and Rule 3’s text then would recommend that community right in the rule itself. May not be such a bad idea now that I’m typing it.