otter

User experience wise, Canvas > Moodle easily

I didn’t know Canvas was open source, that’s cool

I have collected notes on the legal basis of each point, but we wanted to speak to legal professionals before writing that out officially. Additionally, there is some proposed legislation around online harms, and so we will need to wait before we can write something definitive around that. Depending on what ends up becoming law, we may move some rules down to “Prohibited by Fedecan Policy” instead.

It seems these rules, as drafted, are just “nice to have’s” without a corresponding enforcement avenue – assuming of course that all users are subject to Canadian law, which is probably not the case.

The focus for that section was more to do with what our legal responsibilities are, rather than those of the individual users. We do have users from all around the world.

Thank you! That is in line with what I would have said. I’ll add on some remaining thoughts

I’ll tag @ZERONOVABLOSSOM@sh.itjust.works for the reply as well, thank you for raising the discussion about these areas. There are already some lines that I want to improve based on the discussion here.

Mental health && Eating Disoders

As imaqtpie has mentioned, that bit was included because of past issues with social media platforms around those topics. I’ve also found that the culture on the Fediverse has a focus around tagging content so that it is easier for users to control their online experience, especially on the Mastodon side.

I agree with imaqtpie’s stance on those questions. While I want to wait for more discussion before proposing changes, right now I’m leaning towards separating the mental health point from the other two. Graphic content and sexual content is easy to identify, and people expect that content to be labelled. Discussion around sensitive topics might sometimes need a label, but that would be situation dependent. We could include a line to say that people can use their best judgment on when to label such content, or most it to another section entirely.

An asterisk with a definition somewhere in the rules would be nice. I could look it up but I worry my understanding of these terms will differ from what you’re meaning.

That is a good point, we can definitely do that. Maybe some expandable cards (which look like this ) with the text “What is sockpuppetry”, and a longer explanation with examples underneath. I could take from the examples @imaqtpie@sh.itjust.works shared if that would be ok?

There is likely a better term for the SEO point, but I’ll have to think of what to call it. It’s pretty obvious when it happens on Lemmy, since the account will primarily post links to the website that it is trying to promote. Before we enabled registration applications on Pixelfed.ca, we were getting a lot of accounts with bios that included links to gambling sites or sketchy online businesses.

That only works for people who are higher up in their field of work, since they can pick and choose who they work for

Most people going for junior/entry level roles don’t have that luxury

• Pixelfed for sharing public content
• Signal (or a similar messaging platform) for private stories / content intended for specific people

Instagram wasn’t really private to begin with, but that distinction is still helpful to remember IMO

Then you can use something like libredirect with kittygram to view any Instagram only content in a privacy respecting way, like if you open a link

It doesn’t sound like OP is mad at the creator, but annoyed at the increased number of projects that are abandoned

It’s hard to judge the longevity of a project, and LLMs can make a project look more stable and professional than it is. It’s fair to feel annoyed if you mess up that call and move your workflow to something that gets abandoned.

Oh I see, that makes sense :)

Maybe these communities then:

• !opensource@lemmy.ml
• !opensource@programming.dev

You could also post about the community in !communitypromo@lemmy.ca

This sounds good to me, thank you for putting in the time for this!

I didn’t know about your project, it looks cool! I think you could share it outside of your community some more, maybe you can crosspost them to !fediverse@lemmy.world?

I feel that some further refinement is needed. I agree with the sentiment behind the latest version of the rule, but I think it still doesn’t address the recent issues.

The way I see it, there is a very specific type of post that has started showing up very recently, and is getting lots of downvotes. Users here are justifiably suspicious of the pattern.

The ones that get downvotes are usually:

• from new accounts
• the user makes one post, and at most they only responds to comments in that one post
• the software uses the help of LLMs, while the post and/or comments are also helped by LLMs
• the software is made to look “professional”, whether it is the UI, the demo, or the README

I’m not sure what exactly the end goal is, but I don’t believe the story that they all use where they “had this problem and now want to share their solution”. I’m concerned that there is some other end goal, whether it is link farming, SEO manipulation, LLM search result manipulation, or it’s the setup portion of a cyber attack where questionable code will be added later (if it isn’t already).

Normally I would suggest to just moderate it based off of “you know it when you see it”, but in this case it’s difficult since it’s very similar to legitimate posts. There are real users that want to post with a new account, such keeping their professional life separate from their main account. It’s also hard to differentiate it based on licenses, because those recent accounts almost always license it as FOSS. I also don’t think it’s fair to exclude all AI assisted code, since it’s very common to have that now.

Perhaps instead of a rule, we could even try some of the following:

• To reduce the risk of OpenClaw style bots creating content here: AI is ok for the code and external text (ex. the README), but the post here should be written by a human. It’s not like the post needs to be that long to express why someone should look at it, and it won’t go through that many edits. Translations should be done through traditional translation software.
• To prevent driveby posts, we could automate a comment on new posts see if a user knows where they are posting. Asking about their favourite threadiverse community, or how long they have been a member here, or even how they learned about the community might separate bots from real users. It works pretty well for our registration applications on lemmy.ca / piefed.ca etc.

On top of being suspicious, I think it boils down to “projects that have a future” and “projects that don’t have a future”. People in this community want to run software that is likely to stay useful and safe over time, and that’s at the core of why these recent ones are downvoted.

They put out a LOT of updates in a row a few months ago

Hopefully the maintainers are taking a break, and they aren’t burned out.

I’m looking forward to seeing if it snaps onto the play button after opening some content, that’s the main issue I had on Android TV

Have you tried the third party ones? I’ve seen recommendations for Swiftfin

github.com/jellyfin/Swiftfin