Here is a LINK to a long list of citations of extremism, imperialism, and promotion of war, genocide, and violence by the head Lemmy developers and owners of Lemmy ML. People who host Lemmy have the moral responsibility to vet every update and remove all links to donate to Lemmy development or they’re complicit in these crimes.
Until something irredeemably bad comes out about the Piefed devs, they’re infinitely better.
Wasn’t Piefed adding code to block people from upvoting and downvoting too much? If they’re on Lemmy a lot they might not appreciate that kind of restriction, especially if they post a lot of content.
I haven’t seen anything of the sort, personally. A while back the larger Piefed instance was “shadowbanning” instances they don’t promote, but instance owners are free to do as they wish.
There is an “upvote quota” but I’ve personally never hit it so I don’t know what happens when you do, I kind of doubt a regular human could unless they made it their full time job.
Right, and like he points out, as a frequent poster he often engages low-key with the people who comment on his posts with upvotes. So this really made it hard to engage for him.
Regardless it’s a shit decision by the admin. Everyone on Lemmy gets one upvote/downvote per post they interact with. It’s not as if you can upvote or downvote a post multiple times (unless you go though multiple accounts, which that stupid rule wouldn’t fix anyways), so who cares if some people are upvoting or downvoting more than others? That just means they’re on Lemmy more, which is fine.
So it’s a shit rule for something that isn’t a problem, and doesn’t address a possible adjacent problem (making lots of puppet accounts to push personal agendas) that could actually be an issue. That admin is just an idiot and an ass. I don’t blame Pug for leaving.
I can see it being useful if, for example, a group of machines downvoted enough to be a major influence but not enough to trigger bot detection algorithms. In general, decentralized platforms are much less capable of dealing with such attacks, whereas Reddit (before the company went public and the owner sold out to AI) was identifying and banning millions of bots a month using largescale and complex methods which would be impossible at a smaller scale.
But again, that’s a group. It doesn’t trigger over an entire instance, it triggers only on individual accounts. So it would do absolutely nothing against an issue like that, as I pointed out.
It will trigger each individual account and therefor the entire group. There is an easy workaround if they used more accounts but I’m assuming they already used the maximum number of accounts they could get away with if they were botting.
lemmy.world is more left than the Tankie Triad but it’s still funding them so I say leave the entirety of Lemmy behind and go piefed.
Piefed doesn’t look that better tbh
Here is a LINK to a long list of citations of extremism, imperialism, and promotion of war, genocide, and violence by the head Lemmy developers and owners of Lemmy ML. People who host Lemmy have the moral responsibility to vet every update and remove all links to donate to Lemmy development or they’re complicit in these crimes.
Until something irredeemably bad comes out about the Piefed devs, they’re infinitely better.
Gotta look in mbin i guess…neither lemmy or piefed devs seem to be good people tbh
Wasn’t Piefed adding code to block people from upvoting and downvoting too much? If they’re on Lemmy a lot they might not appreciate that kind of restriction, especially if they post a lot of content.
I haven’t seen anything of the sort, personally. A while back the larger Piefed instance was “shadowbanning” instances they don’t promote, but instance owners are free to do as they wish.
There is an “upvote quota” but I’ve personally never hit it so I don’t know what happens when you do, I kind of doubt a regular human could unless they made it their full time job.
piefed.social
PugJesus talks about it, before signing off for good.
Yeah he’s talking about the upvote quota. Everybody gets one, visible on the profile, resets daily.
Right, and like he points out, as a frequent poster he often engages low-key with the people who comment on his posts with upvotes. So this really made it hard to engage for him.
Regardless it’s a shit decision by the admin. Everyone on Lemmy gets one upvote/downvote per post they interact with. It’s not as if you can upvote or downvote a post multiple times (unless you go though multiple accounts, which that stupid rule wouldn’t fix anyways), so who cares if some people are upvoting or downvoting more than others? That just means they’re on Lemmy more, which is fine.
So it’s a shit rule for something that isn’t a problem, and doesn’t address a possible adjacent problem (making lots of puppet accounts to push personal agendas) that could actually be an issue. That admin is just an idiot and an ass. I don’t blame Pug for leaving.
I can see it being useful if, for example, a group of machines downvoted enough to be a major influence but not enough to trigger bot detection algorithms. In general, decentralized platforms are much less capable of dealing with such attacks, whereas Reddit (before the company went public and the owner sold out to AI) was identifying and banning millions of bots a month using largescale and complex methods which would be impossible at a smaller scale.
But again, that’s a group. It doesn’t trigger over an entire instance, it triggers only on individual accounts. So it would do absolutely nothing against an issue like that, as I pointed out.
It will trigger each individual account and therefor the entire group. There is an easy workaround if they used more accounts but I’m assuming they already used the maximum number of accounts they could get away with if they were botting.