This post is about a government contract that is racist in nature. Is that close enough for you?
Totally. Microblogging (twitter alternatives) have a much harder task because they depend on the right users. Especially famous/influential people. Post aggregators (Reddit alternatives) don’t have that constraint.
I get that. And definitely simpler. But what if a new community pops up? It sounds tedious to keep checking back in the search engine
Yeah there would be plenty of circumstances where you wouldn’t, like politics or local news or something. But I have to imagine there are more circumstances where you do want it. I said this below - what if the community owners grouped themselves with their counterparts, kind of like sub-federations
Or maybe the community owners could do it? Seems like a natural extension of federation is for communities to track their counterparts in the federated servers
Thanks for the FYI! I didn’t know it worked like that. How much influence does a single person have over what appears in the All feed? Let’s suppose I find an obscure community and subscribe, and I’m the first person from Lemmy.World to do so. Do posts from that community immediately start showing up in everyone’s All feeds? Or does it take a small army of us subscribing to the same community to make it really show up?
First off , I can tell that this is an emotionally-charged event for a lot of people, so I’ll try to de-escalate and avoid this becoming counterproductive…
I can understand where you’re coming from. Having a big, functioning community like that is not just enjoyable, it’s really useful. Especially for something like android which thrives on public ideas.
I should also say I’m a total a novice here, was not part of that community, and don’t know much about Lemmy.
That said, I just don’t see a reason to make a rule to prevent a community from shutting down if the owners prefer a different instance’s community. They made the community, they can shut it down. It’s like if any ordinary website was just like “Ok, we’re done. We think our competitors are better anyway”. The users would just have to live with that right? Even if they morally disagree with the owners of the competitors, even if they believe the owners of the website were wrong about that assessment. As long as the owners of the new community don’t force the old community to shut down somehow, then that’s just life isn’t it?
I could see an argument that it should be bad fediverse etiquette to shut down without offering to pass the torch to someone else. That would have been a better thing to do. But it can’t be a rule. Who would enforce it anyway? And how?
Should the owners of a community be allowed to close their community? Yes.
Whether you like their reasoning or not, all that happened is they chose to close their community.
The other way to go is to automatically cross-post across federated servers if they have the same community. Why doesn’t it work like that?
@mookulator
@lemmy.world