I moved from Lemmy.ml because I liked the name of Lemmy.world and it ran a newer Lemmy version which meant I could make communities. I moved from Lemmy.world because they defederated from piracy communities they didn't even host (but for some reason still kept the small piracy community they DID host) From thelemmy.club because I couldn't see the Hackintosh community from there (probably defederated) Now I spent some time looking on join-lemmy.org and checked out some instances and this (lemy.lol) instance seemed good, so I chose that.
I had one of my posts on AskLemmy deleted for being "offensive". It was asking a silly question "Are Brits the Americans of Europe?". Some saw the lighthearted side. The professionally offended got it deleted.
Over-moderation will kill Lemmy instances. One of the reasons Reddit became as big as it did is due to very light-touch moderation verging on "absolute freedom of speech". It was refreshing and 'alternative' compared to the increasing sanitisation of the Internet.
Unfortunately Reddit-rotted Zoomers have jumped from the heavy-handed Reddit modding to Lemmy and will quickly fuck up any attempt to grow the platform. Because they don't remember/know how early Reddit worked.
They're trying to moderate Lemmy like it's a billion-user platform when it's a few hundred thousand.
Ah yes it’s the next generations fault. What a unique take on the situation.
Yup. The platform should feel alive.
I remember on Reddit when people were trying the limits and quirks of the algorithm, and you would wake up one day and your feed was filled with something totally unrelated. A few hours later and it went back to normal.
Every platform should have some mechanism to remove troublesome moderators.
The whole point of the Reddit-style was that subreddits could be controlled by moderators and prevented from slipping into the same old tired town square-esque mess that arrives with popularity. I guarantee a mechanism to remove moderators would result in niche communities that get a surge in popularity winding up with the original moderators ousted because all the newcomers don't understand the community.
If you don't like how a community is run, you can start your own for completely free. That's how this works, you shouldn't be able to commandeer a community from the people who started it. If there's a truly problematic moderator, the new community will grow quickly.
The issue is that a community on any platform is made by the average users, not the moderators. If you splinter a community into three competing communities, you will probably severely damage its integrity as a whole. It's similar to the issue that some Discord servers have, where they tell people to take discussion from the main channel into different channels. More often than not, this kills the discussion because few people actually move to a different channel, with most opting to drop the discussion entirely.
A few people shouldn't have complete ownership over something that exists because the people under them make it so.
At the end of the day, it is the moderators who maintain and control the community. They control what users even see, so it's not fair to say a community is made by the average user, the average user is completely silent. I would rather competing communities over every community being at the whim of the masses. The masses are easy to misguide.
Moderation desperately needs openness it is way too easy to get perm banned because you pissed one person off. No notification of what you did wrong, no explanation of what you did wrong, no chance at appeal, and to add insult to injury it permanently unsubscribes you.
I say some spicy stuff now and then. Some gets hammered some not.