Like many of you, I woke up this morning to discover that our instance, along with lemmy.world, had been unexpectedly added to the beehaw block list. Although this development initially caught me off guard, the administrators at beehaw made an announcement shedding light on their decision.

The primary concern raised was our instance’s policy of open registration. Given my belief that the fediverse is still navigating its early stages, I believe that for it to mature, gain traction, and encourage adoption, it is crucial for instances to offer an uncomplicated and direct route for newcomers to join and participate. This was one of the reason I decided to launch this instance. However, I do acknowledge that this inclusive approach brings its unique challenges, including the potential for toxicity and trolls. Despite these hurdles, I maintain the conviction that our collective strength as a community can overcome these issues.

After this happened, the beehaw admins and I had a good chat about their decision. While our stances on registration policies might diverge, we realized that our ultimate goals are aligned: we both strive to foster communities that thrive in an atmosphere of safety and respect, where users can passionately engage in discussions and feel a sense of belonging.

Although the probability of an immediate reversal are slim given the current circumstances, I believe we have managed to identify common ground. It’s evident that, even in separation, we can unite to contribute positively to the broader fediverse community.

In the coming weeks or months, we plan to collaborate with other lemmy instance administrators to suggest enhancements and modifications to the lemmy project. Primarily, our proposals will concentrate on devising tools and features that empower us, as instance administrators, to moderate our platforms effectively.

In the meantime, while I understand may not be ideal for everyone, users who choose to participate on the beehaw instance will be required to register a separate account on their instance.

Thank you all for continuing to make this community great!

  • nivenkos@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why? What would you even check?

    It’s not like you can interview the person and check their ID, etc. - it’s just meaningless bureaucracy that stifles growth.

    • Cracks_InTheWalls
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      From what I understand, it’s ‘did this human read what we’re about here and respond in a way that demonstrates they know what they’re signing onto’?

      At minimum, it weeds out folks who don’t take the time to write a couple sentences, and kinda acts like a crappy lock on a door. If someone’s determined to start some nonsense, it’s not hard to get in and try. But a lot of folks will try the door once, see it doesn’t open right away, and fuck off. They don’t want growth for growth’s sake, so the fact that this stifles growth to a degree isn’t a concern.

      But yeah, I agree it doesn’t scale very well.

      • Lodion 🇦🇺@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        This pretty much. Also I was answering a question, there aren’t really any alternatives. Open, manual approval or closed is it.