Submitted 5 weeks ago by Blaze@lemm.ee to meta@lemm.ee
In reference to this thread:
Tl,dr:
What do you all think about this?
I dont like the idea of defederation from a free speach perspective. But ive said this before and ill say it again. One direction federation is not federation.
Surly we can establiah a federation policy (across as many instances as nessasary) with he following:
I think we need to establish these 3 as the prerequisite of a continued open and free fediverse.
Nice proposal
Unless their users can interact here it’s going to be dead there
I just checked, it does federate:
Oh, so OP got it wrong?
I have to open an account there to try, but I’m pretty sure they can.
Also, I forgot to point out that their interface is very fast and polished, and they have a few nice features (such as multicommunities, though hard-coded and not user-based). This might draw some users there.
Hi everyone, I’m Vinay, the founder of ClubsAll. I’m happy to answer any questions and would like to address where I think ClubsAll might be misunderstood.
“I think it’s unfair for them to federate all our posts and comments, making their platform seem busy, while they don’t allow federation of their own content or self-hosting.”
I completely agree with this concern. However, it’s important to note that ClubsAll is still in its infancy. We currently have around 10 upvotes on Product Hunt, with a nearly non-existent active user base or content. So even if we implement federation, the activity level would be minimal for now.
“We could establish a federation policy across instances, ensuring no single-direction federation of content.”
This proposal seems fair. I’d like to suggest an additional condition: “No single-direction federation of content once an instance reaches a certain level of activity, say, X posts per day.”
The reasoning here is that new and small instances like ClubsAll need time to grow and develop their features before being subjected to such rules. This approach ensures that very young instances aren’t immediately blocked, especially when they might not have much content anyway.
There’s also been talk about defederation. I want to be transparent – ClubsAll is bootstrapped and we have invested a lot of money and sweat to help the community. Right now even my developer has moved on, so new development has halted. This is why I was forced to launch.
If the community chooses to turn against ClubsAll, it won’t survive. That said, I’ll leave the decision to you. Defederation would immediately kill it. If defederation is the path chosen, then so be it.
We have invested a lot of money
Instant distrust there
Hello,
Right now even my developer has moved on, so new development has halted. This is why I was forced to launch.
As stated on the other thread, do you know when you’ll be able to open source the project? Also, why were you forced to release it when your developer left?
Open sourcing is not time dependent. I just need
why were you forced to release it when your developer left? I think I should have released much earlier and developed with input from community. So developer leaving was a trigger to do it. Also, sitting on it would just demotivate me, degrade the code and it would have possibly died a silent death before release.
I think I might start adding a suffix to my posts
If you are reading this on CurbsAll, it was stolen from Lemmy.
I was thinking about this, but defederation might be simpler
Blaze@feddit.org 5 weeks ago
Personally, I think it’s quite unfair for them to federate all our posts and comments, and make their platform appear busy, while they don’t allow federation of their own content, and they don’t allow self-hosting either.
Natanael@slrpnk.net 5 weeks ago
The Threads situation