Beehaw is a community of individuals and therefore does not have any specific political affiliation. At this point in time, we do not know what the political leanings of most of our users are. I would suspect that many of them would identify as progressive because we are explicitly a safe space for minorities. What we stand for and the space that we’re trying to make is compatible with many forms of politics. Unfortunately some political groups build themselves around and choose to elevate or tolerate hate speech. These are the only political groups that we are incompatible with. If any of it was unclear in any of the other posts, I will restate it all here. Beehaw does not tolerate hate speech. Beehaw is an explicitly safe space. We center and promote kindness because that is what we see and love in the world.

Some of the instances that we have chosen to defederate with have explicit political stances and ideologies. Their political stance and ideology had nothing to do with the choice to defederate. The choice to defederate was based on the amount of hate speech present on the instance and/or explicitly endorsing it. Since hate speech is not controlled on the instances that these users come from, we cannot expect them to change their behavior when participating on our instance. While users may exist on some of these platforms who do not spread hate speech, the choice to defederate is made to reduce the burden on our moderators and admins. Occasionally these instances or users from these instances will point their fingers at Beehaw and make claims about our political leanings or whether certain kinds of politics are banned. To be explicitly clear, the only kind of politics that are banned here are those which enable hate speech such as fascism.

Politics on the internet

Many, if not most discussions of politics on the internet are poisoned by virtue signaling. When they are not poisoned by virtue signaling, discussions are often just ways to vent emotions. I believe the reason for this is the platforms themselves and the incentives to engage online. On the internet I can adjust my level of anonymity. An adjustable level of anonymity allows me to change how I speak to others while simultaneously mitigating or removing any consequences to myself. This of course varies based on the platform and what I’m attempting to accomplish, but in the context of speaking with others on the internet, I can be relatively consequence free to say whatever I want on most major platforms. Particularly negative or hateful behavior might cause me to be banned off of a platform, but through the use of technology or other means, I can simply create another account (or migrate to another platform) and continue the same speech. In malicious terms, I do not have to worry about managing someone else’s emotions or my connection to them.

In real life, on the other hand, it is not as easy to pass myself off as someone else. I must be much more aware of how I speak to others because consequences can be much more dire. When discussing politics with others, I may alienate them or myself and so I may choose to be more open to listen rather than soapboxing. The people I’m interacting with may be a regular part of my life and may be people I have come to respect. Understanding how they think might be vitally important to maintaining or improving our connection.

I am presenting the internet and real life as two ends of a spectrum but it is more complicated than that. There are people who are very visible and tied to their identities on the internet just as there are people in real life who use false identities created to mask their true identity. Interactions vary in level of connection, platform, and who happens to know who we are in other spaces on the internet. There are plenty of people who talk on the internet about politics with the explicit goal of changing the minds of others. Some of these individuals are not using this as an outlet to manage their own emotions. These generalizations are presented in this way because I need to talk about these patterns in the context of the platform Lemmy. I’m asking everyone on this platform to be wary of anyone who focuses on politics but is unable to explain the issues themselves. They are probably trying to deceive you, are virtue signaling, or projecting their own insecurities and you should be skeptical of their approach.

I would encourage all of you to think about incentives when presented with political drama online. It is easy to get engaged because politics has a direct and often scary effect on our lives. In this community, it is not difficult to find individuals who are regularly marginalized by politicians. Especially for these minorities, it is completely valid to get emotionally invested in politics and I would personally encourage doing so on some level, but we need to think carefully about the other parties present in a conversation and whether they are willing to listen or incentivized to do so. For the people who are hiding behind anonymity and posting to vent their emotional frustrations with the system they are likely not invested in the community we are growing here and it may be appropriate and healthy to ignore or disengage with these folks.

Forking

It is in this political context that forking from the main Lemmy development has been presented. People are quick to point to potential upsides of forking, but the upsides are an after thought presented as a means to bolster or justify forking. These justifications are for what is ultimately a moral issue. The question at hand is whether it is moral to use a platform developed by someone who has committed acts which one deems immoral. To anyone posing this question, I would ask them to consider what other technology they use every day and to trace the roots back to each invention along the path to today’s day and age. The world has a colonialist history, rife with violence and immoral behavior. Unless you retreat the woods and recreate technologies yourself from scratch, it’s impossible to live in a modern society without benefiting from technology built on countless dead bodies in history.

We do not have the technical expertise to create a new tool from scratch - all we can do is leverage tools that already exist to create communities like this. At the time we created this instance, the service we decided on was Lemmy. We did so with awareness of discussions around the politics of the main instance and developers. I think we’ve done a decent job outlining what we intend to do with this instance and explicitly made strong stances against hate speech and other behavior we do not agree with, including where we disagree with them. When taken in the context of computing in general, these political leanings are also not unique in their social and political harm as compared to some of the tech giants out there. The same is true in comparison to some of the famous tech inventors and innovators; in comparison to the history of computer technology; in comparison to the exploitation and problematic mining of rare earth minerals used in technology; in comparison to the damages we cause to the earth to create the energy used to power our servers. We can follow this path of thinking back all that we want to, and ultimately it’s just not a particularly fruitful discussion to zero in on whether the political leaning of the main developers and instance are in perfect alignment with what we want to accomplish. We are not explicitly endorsing their viewpoint by using their software and we are not tied to using this software forever.

I cannot stress enough how much bandwidth has been taken up by these discussions in recent days. It been brought up as frequently as every few hours across Discord, Matrix, inbox replies, comment replies, new threads, and other forms of communication. We’re currently dealing with a lot of other issues like keeping the server running, expanding to add more communities, moderating the communities amidst a huge influx of users posting and reply content from other instances, managing expenses, optimizing our server, planning for the future, and so much more. We cannot entertain philosophical discussions on all of the wonderful things we ‘could do’ when we’re struggling to keep up with what we’re already currently doing. We have not yet received a serious proposal for a fork which details operational needs when it comes to the maintenance, support, and resources needed to accomplish and maintain it. Simply put we do not believe a fork is necessary at this time.

  • taco@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I like this post! I follow some people elsewhere who are mostly hyping up kbin because the main developer of Lemmy is a tankie and the main developer of kbin maybe isn’t - but it’s such a weird thing to apply a purity test to. Other comments mentioned it but Lemmy is FOSS, so even if you disagree with the political leanings of the developers, you are totally free to do what you want with it. Barring the presence of any backdoors (which would likely/hopefully be caught because, again, FOSS) the main developers don’t have access to any instances created with the software. I don’t really understand the concern.

    Now, if there’s a functional concern with the Lemmy platform and how it’s being developed, then yeah, that’s when a fork should be looked at. It shouldn’t be looked at by an individual community (with a lack of people who can help), but a more widespread effort. But forking because the “lead” developer doesn’t match your purity test? Nah.

  • Nullroad@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    After a buzz over to Hexbear, I find the strain of far-left over there that is more concerned with backbiting and defending former-communist and current parody-communist regimes because blind ‘if west bad, not west good’ thinking, than any of the useful zones of leftist activity.

    I didn’t observe anything that was explicitly hate-speech in my 15 minutes buzzin’ around, but it didn’t really feel ‘kind’, if you know what I mean. I get why Beehaw isn’t federated with them. For the record, I am a deeply left-person. I do think that stating “Beehaw has no specific political affiliation” to be somewhat naive. Midnight fueled thoughts incoming.

    If Beehaw is “explicitly a safe space for minorities”, then we must ask “Why do we need a safe space for minorities?”, “Where does this need come from?” all of which begs questions about power, hierarchy, control, the sources and motive of hate and oppression, and a dozen other related questions that will each need some meaningful response. This leaves you with a couple of choices.

    • We become horribly reductionist (and naive) and just handwave and say “Because we need kindness, and there is hate.” But then, why are we in need of kindness, why is there hate? Why do we need more love? Different hole, same warren. This route I think trips you up in the “unable to explain the issues themselves.” You might retreat to the escape hatch of “focused on politics”, but ignoring something so pervasive and in-your-face as politics is a conscious and focused political act. People who ignore politics are some of the most deeply political people on the planet. There is no escape from politics.
    • The other option: We confront and grapple with the beast, and reach conclusions, answers, and stances to the best of our ability about these issues that lie at the heart of a community’s formation, what we want for it and for people. This is basically the formulation of an ideology or identity. Maybe not a concrete one, but one that will broadly align with some subset population and unalign with another. Maybe this doesn’t quite fit with Beehaw’s vision of community, but at its most over-simple, a community basically defined by both who is in, and who is out, and the nature of those assertions.

    Bullet 1 is (in my opinion) unsustainable; it will present a nice facade for a time, but eventually people and events will make people dig, and dig, and dig. Some of these incidents will put people in a place where they won’t have clarity and purity that comes from deliberate soul-searching, but will be wrapped up in moments of fear, panic, hate, outrage, and other emotions that will bias the rudder towards things the admin may find unpleasant. People come to strange and often harmful choices and beliefs when they don’t have a wellspring of strength to draw from, and instead have to find it in the moment, or as is often the case, give in to the storm (excuse the purple here. It’s late as hell for me). I think this is evident in just about every major online community of the past.

    So as I run out of energy: I think you start thinking about some broad stances, or people here will start thinking of them for you. That “we do not know what the political leanings of most of our users are” may be a dangerous sign that there isn’t really a pulse on the kind of community you’re building, and are accidentally just throwing together a place where people gather.

    • mustyOrange@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just took a stroll over by hexbear to see what you’re talking about. To be honest, I really don’t see those folks being pro-state communism. They are pretty clearly just anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist, and very much see them as being much more anarcho communism aligned than anything.

      Is there widespread claims of them talking hate speech other than bitching about liberals? Hexbear seems annoying in the sense that they are extremely sarcastic and bitter. Then again, I’m a syndicalist myself, so I do agree with a lot of their points, but just hate that kind of /r/completanarchy style of board where it’s clear everyone has a mix of major depression, anger, and trust issues, and everyone goes around enabling eachother.

      As for the rest of your post, I don’t think a message board needs to have a political ideology per se - in fact, I think it’s better to not have one. The admin team itself should disagree with one another to an extent imo. Specific communities might work with one cohesive set of ideology, but the instance itself should just have general rules imo, especially since a lot of instances seem to focus mainly on general topics. Anti-hatespeech rules in general cover a lot of ground in keeping conversation genuine.

      The pulse of communities is not agreement, it’s discussion. It’s not kindness that’s needed, it’s good faith. Telling a TERF or a Nazi to fuck off isn’t kind, but oh well it’s warranted as they don’t post in good faith. I don’t think the admins need to do anything more than that.

      And if people start to assume mass political bias, oh well, they can start their own instance

      • h14h@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Completely agree on the notion of the community needing “good faith” over “kindness”.

        A discussion forum loses much of its value when even a modest percentage of its userbase isn’t participating in a free exchange of ideas, but rather evangelising their favorite ideas or beliefs by abusing the tools provided by the forum in bad faith to promote or suppress ideas that respectively support or contradict their ideology.

        It’s one thing to present your contradictory/minority beliefs with supporting evidence to the forum in the hopes it stands on its own, and quite another to coordinate w/ others or create alt accounts to invade that forum and create an illusion of consensus through voting/commenting accordingly.

        It doesn’t matter whether the ideology is white supremacy, communism, or even something apolitical like preferring Linux over Windows – astroturfing and bad faith interactions of any allegiance are toxic to a discussion forum.

  • Emi@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Unless you retreat the woods and recreate technologies yourself from scratch, it’s impossible to live in a modern society without benefiting from technology built on countless dead bodies in history.

    This makes complete sense, I also think open source and federated platforms like this give users the most autonomy from the creators of the software when compared to other platforms. I do wish there was the ability to port users and communities across instances, though, kinda like you can do with mastodon. I understand that would be hard for the developers to create, but I think it would help with the creation of a truly free platform.

    Furthermore, I think some of the concern around some primary instances is a little overblown, as most of the larger ones have their own policies against bigotry and fascism. However, I understand that the type moderation between instances differs, and that is the best part about federated services.

  • lwaxana_katana@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am new to Lemmy and also to Beehaw. Does defederation mean that we can’t load comments/threads/communities from defederated servers via Beehaw (and vice versa for users of instances Beehaw has defederated from)?

  • Red Army Dog Cooper@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Question, you mention that the only instances you block allow fascism, however you have blocked both Lemmygrad and preemptively Hexbear, both of them are Communist in nature, and I feel that this is crazy to need to point out, but communism is the polar opposite to Fascism, and they are ideological opposed in every way, You will never find a more ardent anti-facist than a communist, so I feel like this is a bad faith attack on these instances. I also would like to point out that First Hexbear has not federated, nor made any plans to federate with Beehaw, over concerns with Beehaw moderation, and Lemmygrad has Rule 2. No Bigotry Rule 3. be Respectful and Rule 5. No Right Deviationists (No fascists), and they are very well enforced, and Rule 3 in particular is better enforced there than over here on Beehaw.

    • Lionir [he/him]@beehaw.orgM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I also would like to point out that First Hexbear has not federated, nor made any plans to federate with Beehaw, over concerns with Beehaw moderation

      I’m kinda interested to read that because I’ve personally read the opposite.

    • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Anti-fascists? These people revere the likes of Mao and Stalin. In what meaningful way were Mao and Stalin different from fascists?

  • Synthclair@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is it possible to have a list of de-federated instances from Beehive? I think it may be good for transparency, even if I am pretty satisfied about how things are being done here!

    • daguito81@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Go to the bottom of the page, click on the Instances link and you’ll se 2 lists, all federated instances and all defederated instances.

    • lemillionsocks@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah lemmygrad will fade in popularity and lemmy.ml has already gotten so big it’s shifted politically. It also seems like the creators are fine with other ideas on their instance too. Maybe it’s just cause they know lemmy wouldnt get adopted otherwise but the only strict moderating against speech I see is against the obvious trolls and alt right fascists so far.

      Then you have beehaw and the other instances outright blocking lemmygrad and things seem just peachy

      • Laconic@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I didn’t realize lemmygrad was tolerating hate speech over there. That’s fucked up.

        • ratboy@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think it has more to do with them being Marxist Leninists which is really problematic to a lot of people. You should go check it out and see for yourself what the posts look like.

          • Laconic@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            What specifically about being a Marxist Leninist is so bad that it warrants lumping them in with racists? I’m not an ML and I disagree with them on a number of things, but they’re no Nazis. I looked around I didn’t see anything particularly repugnant.

            • ratboy@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Honestly I’m pretty much on the same boat as you and I feel like the frenzy is overblown, especially right now with the huge influx of people from a platform that by and large has some pretty lib takes. Some examples that people have given are their unwavering support of China, Russia, North Korea and denial about tianenman Square. I kinda side eye people who don’t have nuanced takes about North Korea or any of those places for that matter. I am also hard pressed to think that people eho specifically identify as ML’s wouldnt do their research, but of course there are all kinds. I am curious what specifically has been done and said that warrants hate speech on there to make it such a big deal. But yeah it’s not like people are screaming “LETS GENOCIDE PEOPLE!!!”. Idk I find it troublesome that people are coming here having no idea about these concepts and are just told “they spew hate speech”. Because most people are probably thinking that they’re over there thinking about how to advance the white race and throwing around the F slur, which is not what’s going on.

              • EthicalAI@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I kinda side eye people who don’t have nuanced takes about North Korea

                Genuinely curious, what kind of nuanced take is there around North Korea to be had? My impression is it’s basically a slave state with a God King.

                As a leftist the only positive take I have about most of these states is that A. The ideas were new and they didn’t know better, or B. The situation they came from was so bad they were justified to try something, but then they got power and grew authoritarian as people do. For instance I think Cuba had every reason to revolt. I also think Castro was a repressive dictator.

                • Ratboy@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  (I am the same OP, just using my lemmy.ml account now that the site isn’t down for me) The person who responded to this before I was able gave some pretty general information regarding my thoughts on North Korea here. I used to eat up all of the American propaganda just like everyone else and fancied myself a leftist as well. But as a leftist, we should all know that we should be highly critical of most news media. I’m also living in the US so that’s the perspective I’m bringing here, btw. Anyway, I have done a bit of research and that small amount has changed my mind drastically on how I look at communist countries.

                  I am not here to say that I think there is nothing problematic about the place, but their position was largely foisted upon them by imperialism. I cannot fault them for the extreme stance, whether I agree with it or not. Also, I feel that the hysteria around these countries whipped up by the US serves to distract us from how truly fucked up our country is. 25 percent of people in the US are food insecure, 21 percent are illiterate, there are daily mass shootings and constant acts of terrorism, train derailments poisoning towns all in the name of money, we are more and more becoming a police state…We can’t say for sure that we definitely have it better here just because we can leave, or that we live with the illusion of choice.

                  In your response, you wrote “My impression is it’s basically a slave state with a God King”. I would implore you, when you can, when you have energy, to do a bit of research on things like this when your impression is so extreme. You don’t need to change your stance, you can still feel how you feel, but base that on some semblance of research. If you’re curious I’m happy to try and whip up some articles or youtube videos for you to check out that might be interesting.

                  Outside of that, relating back to comparing the ideology of Marxist Leninists to hate speech: hate speech is defined as “abusive or threatening speech or writing that expresses prejudice on the basis of ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or similar grounds.” I have not seen any of this kind of speech on lemmygrad, or from anyone who identifies as ML. In fact a lot of ML’s are staunchly opposed to racism, sexism, homophobia/transphobia, etc. and are part of marginalized groups. Marxist Leninists are not pacifists and from what I gather do believe that war and violence are necessary for revolution but I’ve never seen anyone advocate for genocide, so I feel that the connection is heavy handed. That being said, that’s just my opinion, man, and the mods for beehaw can do what they wish

                  Editing to add: I also don’t know everything, and there may be some context with lemmygrad that I’m missing, so feel free to educate me if I’m being reductive over here

  • bartera@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t pretend to change anything of how this place works, specially considering it’s federated and, as you say, presumably different spaces can be forked and “set up their own rules”.

    I remain, however quite keen to see if the “no hate speech” is a consistent thing or simply a “hate is ok against the right targets” and “being on the other side of X issue is hate speech” (e.g.: any controversial topic such as being against a particular war, being in favor of/against political party X, expressing views opposed to government policies, not sharing a specific view by the demographic majority of the site (Usually US/UK/AUS)).

    Ideally, I can set up something where I can get exposure to many views and go here and there without having to feel I’m in X circlejerk and the narrative is packet Y, that comes with all these predetermined views in this overton window.

    In a way, the more I have access to, the better. Because I can move from side to side learning about the others. Obviously, this view is not shared by many and thet would gladly censor 75% of the space to preserve the right way, claiming it’s “moderation”. I don’t disagree on moderation but I think that we’re too interfered at this point that we don’t even see how little room we have for discussion (which then creates very narrow discussions in different niches).

    In any case, sorry for the stream of consciousness. Excited to see how all this works and hopefully I’m able to participate and gain insights from a wide array of perspectives in a wide descentralized network.

    • Gaywallet (they/it)@beehaw.orgOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      As is stated elsewhere, we are explicitly intolerant of the intolerant. Hate speech in response to hate speech is perfectly acceptable - calling Nazis out is cool and correct.

      To be absolutely clear as has also been stated in depth elsewhere (please read the other philosophy posts in the sidebar) we are not interested in creating echo chambers on issues which do not involve hate speech or violate the explicitly safe space we have here. You’re welcome to discuss politics with other people, so long as neither of you are advocating hate speech. We recognize that often hate speech comes from a place of ignorance and needing education because we internalize many values from society which are colonialist, but if we treat each other with good faith we can learn a lot from diverse opinions.

      • nicholas@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        But you have not addressed my main concern regarding the definition of words. Here’s a perfect example from your comment:

        Hate speech in response to hate speech is perfectly acceptable - calling Nazis out is cool and correct.

        I already see based on the comments here that anyone who votes for a Republican is going to being considered a Nazi and therefore used as justification for the rules to be applied unevenly against certain political affiliations.

        Do you at least see and acknowledge my concern? Because this is going to turn into another dead and boring echochamber extremely quickly if these questions are not addressed head-on upfront.

        You claim that this is a non-partisan space. Is it or is it not? Be upfront about what the rules are if you want real honest and well-intentioned engagement from a diverse group of opinions.

        • alyaza [they/she]@beehaw.orgM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I already see based on the comments here that anyone who votes for a Republican is going to being considered a Nazi[…]

          other people have covered the rest here, so i’ll just point out that if you’re interested in soapboxing about “well-intentioned engagement from a diverse group of opinions”, you should probably take a second to consider why you’re seemingly unwilling to take such engagement from the other direction–or to even engage with why people might believe what you’re describing. i feel comfortable saying this because you were also unwilling to hear out the other side in a previous discussion on here, even when provided with evidence and points from multiple users that directly contradicted your assertions.

          • nicholas@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m in a forum where I am dominated by opposing viewpoints. To say that I’m unwilling to engage is laughable.

            And the linked example is a back-and-forth with disagreement. Everything was completely civil. Are you saying that disagreeing with the established hivemind-narrative is “refusing to engage”? Disagreement and debate should be encouraged as long as it’s civil. I really don’t understand the point that you’re trying to make here. And I absolutely loathe the Reddit-like behavior of digging through someone’s post history with the ill-intent to smear them.

            • SugarApplePie@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Everything was completely civil.

              Later in that thread you say

              Ah so you’re just a left-wing partisan conspiracy theorist. … Or you’re a troll. Which is probably the case.

              Which doesn’t really read as “completely civil”.

              To say that I’m unwilling to engage is laughable.

              The discussion that was linked quite literally shows your unwillingness to engage. I don’t get lying about something that everyone can check, I can only assume this is your genuine POV. That coupled with your comment earlier in this thread about how “here anyone who votes for a Republican is going to being considered a Nazi” gives the image of someone who does not actually care about “well-intentioned engagement from a diverse group of opinions”. It just reads as a persecution complex. You can’t even give well-intentioned engagement for your opinions!

              digging through someone’s post history with the ill-intent to smear them.

              It’s a conversation you had with that person like 3 days ago that helps highlight the bad faith engagement here. It’s not like they pulled out some unrelated tweet you made 8 years ago, lol.

  • OptimusPrime@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    TL;DR:

    Beehaw is a politically neutral community that does not tolerate hate speech. They defederate with instances that promote hate speech. Online political discussions are often toxic due to anonymity, while real-life discussions require more awareness. Beehaw advises being skeptical of individuals who focus on politics but lack understanding. They encourage considering incentives and disengaging from those who use anonymity to vent. Forking from the Lemmy platform is debated in a political context, but Beehaw does not see it as necessary at the moment. They prioritize server management and other tasks and haven’t received a serious proposal for a fork.

  • ratboy@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    My whole experience of moving to lemmy has felt like when people from another state move to a new one and complain about how awful it is and force it to change into where they left. If people are so absplutely offended by the politics of its originators, go create your own social media and stop harassing the poor mods, especially if the mods of this particular instance are trying to make your experience more palatable.

    • CannaVet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I settled on lemmy.world, but yeah 90% of the lemmy related discussion I see is “Why doesn’t this work like Reddit and when can I expect it to work like Reddit?”

      I’ve tried to do my part in explaining this isn’t meant to be Reddit, but I’m already seeing an increase in hostility directed at devs for the lack of central authority (which is the thing they’re fleeing in the first place but fuck me for pointing that out lol.)

      • SterlingVapor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Hey server buddy!

        I think it’s a mindset - with a company at the head, if you don’t like the product, you should complain.

        They need to understand this isn’t a product - it’s a project. It’s not mature yet, and it’s trying to solve a very difficult problem - how do you make social media healthier and more resistant to exploitation. The design they’ve settled on is complex and ambitious, and I’m pretty impressed it’s been able to scale up this well

        All that being said, the main complaint I’ve noticed (and I think is valid and it often gets dismissed) - to sign up users are given a choice (which server to join), and to make an informed choice there’s a minimum of a few pages of required reading

        It definitely matters, and the way you’re presented this choice is pretty overwhelming

        I’m working on a Lemmy client, and my thought is this - break up the options. Give users a choice of 3-5 options with a “next” button and a search option.

        Another is the difficulty of finding and subscribing to communities - I’ve noticed a huge improvement with some recent changes, but there’s always more that can be done

        Anything else you’ve noticed? Particularly if it’s something to keep in mind as I write the app

        • renard_roux@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I just migrated from Reddit, and liked what I read about BeeHaw. Signup was a bit confusing, but eventually just sent an email to the team, wrote a bit about myself (education, family, interested, political leanings, probably massively oversharing 😅), and got an invite a few minutes later.

          So far I really like the tone in here, and especially the quality of the comments. Feels like Reddit at its best, nice and helpful people.

          I was on Reddit for 15 years (plus a few years lurking), and it’s been my largest casual time-sink throughout. Leaving sucks. In the end, I couldn’t accept losing my Android client — 10 year anniversary with Relay a few days ago — the thought of having to use the official app made me gag, as probably 95% of my Reddit time is on mobile. So I left for BeeHaw/Lemmy, and now I have to work with something that’s (from a UX standpoint) probably even worse 😅

          It’s the principle, though; they’re fucking over their users so incredibly hard, and I don’t want to be a part of that anymore. Even if that means having to use a platform that isn’t mature yet. Fuck it, I’ve been here before, and I can cope with having to start over again. I hope Lemmy can get to a point where there’s a great experience to be had on mobile (I’m currently on/in Jerboa, btw). Maybe you’re the one to fix it? 😍

          So — a few things that I’m struggling with that might be worth considering for your app:

          • [UPDATE: Jerboa is already capable of auto-hiding read posts, I just hadn’t found the setting (it’s under your profile, “View read posts”, and it’s enabled by default. Be aware that disabling it also hides your own posts. I would still love to be able to manually hide posts, as well as upvoted posts (also Stickied posts!).] — The ability to hide read/upvoted posts! This is my main pain point, by a very wide margin. As a Relay user, I’m used to a fresh screen with fresh new posts every time I open the app. Not so in Jerboa. Open app, and there is (potentially) a very long scroll ahead of me too get past posts I’ve already read and upvoted. I can look for upvotes, but I don’t upvotes everything, so not a perfect indicator. The only functional one seems to be a slightly greyed-out post title (dark theme). My current understanding (very limited, granted) is that this is a Lemmy thing in general, not just Jerboa. Something about lacking the ability to react to a post being previously viewed æ upvoted? Either way, I’d love a setting that would let me hide all posts that I’ve upvoted, or hide all posts that I’ve read (clicked). Also the ability to manually hide a post from the main list view (get rid of something without having to upvoted or click on/into). In combination with a Refresh-button, maybe?

          • Better options for sorting posts (newest / popular / etc.). Probably also a Lemmy thing. Sorry, this seems to be there already, I’d just missed it somehow.

          • Not having to manually scroll this text box up constantly because what I’m typing is disappearing behind the keyboard. Seriously, Jerboa? 😑

          • The ability to hide the downvote button, probably on a per-instance basis, as some allow downvotes, and some don’t. All of a sudden I don’t see the downvote button anymore 🙄 An update perhaps?

          • Proper spacing between list items. Very minor gripe.

          • The ability to turn off excerpts on the front page.

          Sorry, have to go to a meeting, will try to come back to this later and add more suggestions 😊

          Good luck with the app! Can’t wait to see it 😃 It’s for Android, right? 😬

          • Spzi@lemmy.click
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’d love a setting that would let me hide all posts that I’ve upvoted, or hide all posts that I’ve read (clicked). Also the ability to manually hide a post from the main list view (get rid of something without having to upvoted or click on/into).

            Me too!