Hello everyone,
Opening this thread as a kind of follow-up on my thread yesterday about the drop in monthly active users on !fediverse@lemmy.ml.
As I pointed in the thread, I personally think that having some consolidated core communities would be a better solution for content discovery, information being posted only once, and overall community activity.
One of the examples of the issue of having two (or more) exactly similar Fediverse communities (!fediverse@lemmy.world and !fediverse@lemmy.ml ) is that is leads to
- people having to subscribe to both to see the content
- posters having to crosspost to both
- comment being spread across the crossposts instead of having all of the discussion and reactions happening in the same place.
I am very well aware of the decentralized aspect of Lemmy being one of its core features, but it seems that it can be detrimental when the co-existing communities are exactly the same.
We are talking about different news seen from the US or Europe, or a piece of news discussed in places with different political orientations.
The two Fediverse communities look identical, there is no specific editorial line. The difference in the audience is due to the federation decisions of the instances, but that’s pretty much it, and as the topic of the community is the Fediverse itself, the community should probably be the one accessible from most of the Fediverse users.
What do you think?
Also, as a reminder, please be respectful in the comments, it’s either one of the rules of the community or the instance. Disagreeing is fine, but no need to be disrespectful.
I think Lemmy should come up with a meta cross post type. Where the post only exists once, but it’s indexed in multiple communities, and moderators of those communities can remove the cross post. Without affecting the original post
Kind of like a symbolic link
If not that then give us the ability to have relative references to posts inside of Lemmy. Instead of referencing a URL to a specific instance, kind of like the ! Or @ for for community names and usernames.
Then across post could at least link to the canonical discussion for talking.
ActivityPub wise this could be modeled pretty cleanly as (what Mastodon calls) boosts. Or perhaps quote boosts as implemented by every software except upstream Mastodon (including Mastodon forks like Treehouse or Fedibird), if different comment threads are needed.
Hell, let’s make cross posts work like that.
This is effectively how the Community-following-Community proposal works. I’ll repost what I commented in this thread:
I still believe the best solution is the ability for Communities to follow other Communities. That is essentially a fully automated version of this sibling proposal.
This has been explained in great detail by ‘jamon’ here:
https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy-ui/issues/1113#issuecomment-1595273502
This basically lets Communities opt to federate directly with other Communities, abiding by the same network dynamics as the fediverse at large, I.e. cross-network moderation by (de)federation.
Here’s a succinct description of the problem that C-C following solves:
There is already a FEP for this functionality: https://socialhub.activitypub.rocks/t/fep-d36d-sharing-content-across-federated-forums/3366?u=erlend_sh
Some discussion about how crossposts could work differently
https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/3827
https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/2987
In the meantime, third-party apps can combine posts from multiple communities (that have the same URL) coalesced one single post, and pull comments from every instance’s post.
Automatic merging of that sort is problematic as each community can have significantly different rules, conventions, moderation strictness, priorities and overall “vibe”.
It can also make comment sections confusing where people talk about the comment section. When different viewers see different versions of the comment section (for example through different combinations of federation), it can be extra confusing to merge them all into one stream.