nodebb and discourse are working on activitypub support. See https://crag.social/@devnull/111732273308478221

Entirely unmoderated tags are not an option for lemmy as the moderation workload would be too much. Additionally users being able to type out tags themselves introduces splintering in the tag contents due to typos. A better solution is a curated list of tags users can attach to their posts

I vehemently disagree with the main idea behind this RFC. Just let users put arbitrary tags on their posts and other users can search for whatever tags they want. The rest of the fediverse has unmoderated hashtags and it works fine. I don’t see a good reason hashtags should require moderation. And typos can be corrected by editing the post.

Adding those restrictions just makes this feature more complex than it needs to be and reduces compatibility with the fediverse. Users of any fediverse software can create a post in a lemmy community and those posts may have arbitrary tags. Why should lemmy users have less capability on lemmy than external users?

Finally, hashtags could be a useful way to filter posts within a community if these restrictions are dropped. I posted this in the github thread, but imagine a general programming community. Posts could be tagged with a language, paradigm (OOP, functional, etc), or whatever else to allow users to browse subtopics within a community. Having to request moderators add a tag is an unnecessary extra step.

It’s not OP’s fault, but voting is how we’re supposed to curate content. This post doesn’t have a title or description so it’s a bad post on lemmy and I think downvoting it is acceptable. Don’t consider votes a reflection of a user’s value or standing

Agreed. This is a lemmy bug. The OP is on mastodon (where video previews are fetched and displayed) and has no control over how its rendered over here. It’d be nice if lemmy fetched the title and description

This is exciting. I think code forges are one of the biggest opportunities for ActivityPub to really go mainstream and change the internet. Not only because it’ll make working with open source way easier since you can work with any compatible forge, but developers will be more exposed to ActivityPub just by working with the software and so more likely to participate in AP dev. It will be interesting to see what effect this has on the fediverse. There’s been a lot of talk from various organizations/companies but this will be the first large project adopting AP. I’m interested to see how development goes for them and for other fediverse projects.

I wonder what changes it will force on Mastodon. Masto won’t be the biggest project anymore and won’t be able to throw its weight around as much. Just like the recent influx of users forced the implementation of full text search and has reenergized conversations about quote posts, I think federated gitlab would force masto to rethink some things.

If Mozilla open sourced it years ago like they promised, it could be picked up by someone else.

Not really. There was a recent article that came out that said tumblr is still losing money. I don’t see them spending time and money on something that doesn’t have a direct monetization strategy, especially since their userbase isn’t actually asking for ActivityPub

Rereading my comment, it comes off a little brusque so I want to clarify a bit. I think user-defined multireddits are a good feature and could exist alongside my own proposal. Users having more control over their own feed is a good thing.

But my proposal has a different goal, which is to reduce duplication of links and keep conversation more centralized. It’s not a feature most users would even be aware of because it’s only manageable by community mods.

Community Grouping #3071 is an issue I created and it’s specifically not related to multis. Its purpose is to allows mods to unite their distinct communities into a logical community.

But #1 is predicated on #2. If developers are aware of the risk of EEE, then they won’t try to remain compatible with Meta extensions, which means development of the open AP ecosystem will continue at the same pace.

Yes I read that and explained why I don’t think its relevant. Facebook can’t slow down progress on the fediverse because:

1. progress is already slow. The fediverse has been in development for 15 years and still is a clunky, niche network and likely will always be less polished than large corporate networks.
2. Every developer on the fediverse is aware of the EEE playbook and next to none of them will try to remain compatible with any corporate extensions.

I’ve never really understood the EEE argument here. XMPP was an open proptocol, Google embraced it and attracted users, then extended it and took those users away. But according to this article, Google didn’t extinguish XMPP. It’s still around and serving its niche community.

That’s already the situation the fediverse is in. This is a niche community and there are already existing social media companies that the majority of internet users are on. If Facebook joins the fediverse, it brings billions of new users to the fediverse. If they then leave the fediverse, ActivityPub will still be here and all of us on the real fediverse will still be here, in a niche community. Everyone here has already chosen the fediverse despite it being a clunky, unpolished, niche network. How is EEE a relevant fear for the fediverse?

The numbers for lemmy are probably way outdated. Take a look at https://lemmyverse.net/communities. It lists 636 instances but FediDB only has 302. And remember most of this growth has only come in the past week or two.

Also, mastodon only has 1.25 million active users according to FediDB, though that’s probably outdated too.

I should have checked the issue tracker before posting this. There’s already an issue related to community discovery at https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/2951

They abuse the subject field which I think lemmy ignores. name is a separate field that is used for the title

It’s not as common to push users to apps on desktop, but its a tried-and-true practice on mobile. I’m sure companies would do it if they could, but app stores and app lockin aren’t as strong on desktop as on mobile

Users can block those with extensions so the data isn’t as reliable

An extension could work, but some users won’t want to install an extension and other users can’t install them (work computer/mobile browser).