this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2023
615 points (100.0% liked)

Beehaw Support

2797 readers
40 users here now

Support and meta community for Beehaw. Ask your questions about the community, technical issues, and other such things here.

A brief FAQ for lurkers and new users can be found here.

Our September 2024 financial update is here.

For a refresher on our philosophy, see also What is Beehaw?, The spirit of the rules, and Beehaw is a Community


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.


if you can see this, it's up  

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

hey folks, we'll be quick and to the point with this one:

we have made the decision to defederate from lemmy.world and sh.itjust.works. we recognize this is hugely inconvenient for a wide variety of reasons, but we think this is a decision we need to take immediately. the remainder of the post details our thoughts and decision-making on why this is necessary.

we have been concerned with how sustainable the explosion of new users on Lemmy is--particularly with federation in mind--basically since it began. i have already related how difficult dealing with the explosion has been just constrained to this instance for us four Admins, and increasingly we're being confronted with external vectors we have to deal with that have further stressed our capabilities (elaborated on below).

an unfortunate reality we've also found is we just don't have the tools or the time here to parse out all the good from all the bad. all we have is a nuke and some pretty rudimentary mod powers that don't scale well. we have a list of improvements we'd like to see both on the moderation side of Lemmy and federation if at all possible--but we're unanimous in the belief that we can't wait on what we want to be developed here. separately, we want to do this now, while the band-aid can be ripped off with substantially less pain.

aside from/complementary to what's mentioned above, our reason for defederating, by and large, boils down to:

  • these two instances' open registration policy, which is extremely problematic for us given how federation works and how trivial it makes trolling, harassment, and other undesirable behavior;
  • the disproportionate number of moderator actions we take against users of these two instances, and the general amount of time we have to dedicate to bad actors on those two instances;
  • our need to preserve not only a moderated community but a vibe and general feeling this is actually a safe space for our users to participate in;
  • and the reality that fulfilling our ethos is simply not possible when we not only have to account for our own users but have to account for literally tens of thousands of new, completely unvetted users, some of whom explicitly see spaces like this as desirable to troll and disrupt and others of whom simply don't care about what our instance stands for

as Gaywallet puts it, in our discussion of whether to do this:

There's a lot of soft moderating that happens, where people step in to diffuse tense situations. But it's not just that, there's a vibe that comes along with it. Most people need a lot of trust and support to open up, and it's really hard to trust and support who's around you when there are bad actors. People shut themselves off in various ways when there's more hostility around them. They'll even shut themselves off when there's fake nice behavior around. There's a lot of nuance in modding a community like this and it's not just where we take moderator actions- sometimes people need to step in to diffuse, to negotiate, to help people grow. This only works when everyone is on the same page about our ethos and right now we can't even assess that for people who aren't from our instance, so we're walking a tightrope by trying to give everyone the benefit of the doubt. That isn't sustainable forever and especially not in the face of massive growth on such a short timeframe.

Explicitly safe spaces in real life typically aren't open to having strangers walk in off the street, even if they have a bouncer to throw problematic people out. A single negative interaction might require a lot of energy to undo.

and, to reiterate: we understand that a lot of people legitimately and fairly use these instances, and this is going to be painful while it's in effect. but we hope you can understand why we're doing this. our words, when we talk about building something better here, are not idle platitudes, and we are not out to build a space that grows at any cost. we want a better space, and we think this is necessary to do that right now. if you disagree we understand that, but we hope you can if nothing else come away with the understanding it was an informed decision.

this is also not a permanent judgement (or a moral one on the part of either community's owner, i should add--we just have differing interests here and that's fine). in the future as tools develop, cultures settle, attitudes and interest change, and the wave of newcomers settles down, we'll reassess whether we feel capable of refederating with these communities.

thanks for using our site folks.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bankimu@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I am not going to stand for this.

I didn't come here into the fediverse to have instances dictate on their whim that I'll not have access to something.

This goes completely against the idea of having an unified platform. You can of course do whatever you want, but I'll not be part of a closed garden.

[–] SemioticStandard@beehaw.org 29 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I think your idea of what federation should look like is not quite right, which is okay, it’s not an insult, it’s new to many of us.

The idea isn’t that everything is open, with a unified platform that shares everything, everywhere. The Lemmy software is open source, but the way instances are moderated is highly customizable, and that is an intentional design decision.

You’re probably used to common moderation styles on Reddit, where users have more control over content via up/downvotes, and some Lemmy instances may run just like that, taking a more hands-off approach to moderation. But Beehaw is not like that. The goals and moderation style here are different. Beehaw is looking to create a different kind of space, with more control over what’s posted. There are pros and cons to this, which are beyond the scope of this comment to explore. The point is this: different Lemmy instances are run by different people, with different visions and styles. If you don’t like how Beehaw is run, it’s probably going to be a better experience for you, as well as the people here who do like how it’s run, if you find an instance that more closely aligns with what you’re looking for.

But coming onto someone else’s instance and aggressively demanding things conform to your desires or trying to inform the owners of what you will or won’t “stand for” is rude, though. There’s a better way to communicate with people, and in the future I hope you choose grace.

[–] cavemeat@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago

Very well said. Federation is supposed to be for everyone, but that doesn't mean that individual servers have to cater to everyone.

[–] Fluffybirb@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago

Very well said. I wish I could write out my thoughts as eloquently as this!

[–] amju_wolf@pawb.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The idea isn’t that everything is open, with a unified platform that shares everything, everywhere. The Lemmy software is open source, but the way instances are moderated is highly customizable, and that is an intentional design decision.

I dunno, that's like saying "various mailservers choose to have different rules for their users, and we choose to block some of those mailservers because we disagree with how they're ran".

And while that's technically in your power, and might make sense if it actually is a mailserver that's sending 100% just spam, it doesn't really make sense if you block any significant number of normal users.

I think the ideal way forward would be having individual blocklists, where each instance would have defaults for its users, but the user could choose to un-block the remote instances if they wish. Defederation should be reserved only for extremely disruptive instances, and even then there should be an appeal process or a yearly (or so) re-evaluation.

[–] KeavesSharpi@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think that the whole point of federation is that you, the end user, have the option of choosing where you want to go. You want to use those other instances, nobody is stopping you. You can actually use as many as you want. The instance owner gets to choose what is displayed on their instance, and that's OK as well. You even have the option of making your very own instance and displaying everything from everywhere. Nobody is dictating what you can or can't see. They're just choosing not to be the ones to show it to you.

[–] narwhal@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'm a bit new to this whole federation thing. As I understand it, it's supposed to be like email?

I don't think I've ever heard something similar happening in email space. For example: Hotmail can suddenly decide that Hotmail users can only email other Hotmail users going forward.

Don't get me wrong, I understand the admins' concerns. Just trying to understand about federation more.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

It absolutely does happen with email, you just don't notice it. You could just start sending porn to as many emails as you can find. If you use a reputable email provider like Gmail or Yahoo, it won't take them too long to ban you. If you stand up your own email server and do the same, your whole server will be blocked.

Mostly this ends up as transparent to users, but it does happen and is actively managed.

It's a bit of a tangent, because public communities are different from private email, but the defederation concept exists in both.

[–] Soki@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

I think the imortant difference to email here is that communication is open to everyone, not person to person. This creates the need for moderation and selection.

[–] rowdy@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

“I’m not going to stand for this” Dude just move to another instance. Literally no one is stopping you. It’s the whole reason for the fediverse. They can manage their instance as they see fit. You sound like a complete keyboard warrior, get over yourself and move on.

[–] dogmuffins@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

They're on lemmy.ml, not even on any of the effected servers.

[–] A2PKXG@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If it's a bad decision, the fediverse will move on without fragile instances like beehaw. If it's a good decision, beehaw will be even better from now on.

Just wait and see. The invisible hand of the free market will set things right!

[–] amju_wolf@pawb.social 3 points 1 year ago

I agree in theory, but if we want to attract regular people from Reddit, this is really bad - if one day they wake up and don't see half of the communities they expect they'll just be pissed and probably leave entirely.

[–] ursakhiin@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

I would like to point out to you, this decision doesn't impact you at all. Your account appears to be on lemmy.ml. the only thing this decision does is prevent users on Beehaw from interacting with content on lemmy.world and sh.itjust.works and vice-versa.

As a user of beehaw.org, I'm fine with this choice. If I discover content I want to engage with on a defederate instance I will create an account that can interact with it along with my existing account on Beehaw.