• Ulu-Mulu-no-die@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I don’t understand. Reddit is exactly the same, it has thousands of different subs, many with overlapping content, many duplicated because someone didn’t like the mods, yet I don’t recall people saying reddit was broken because of it.

    Why is Lemmy suddenly broken just because people naturally do the same reddit thing here?

    Can’t we just ask for a feature like multi-reddit that lets users aggregate different subs into the same feeds (like sort of collections) instead of trying to reinvent the wheel?

    • BoaPirate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      i think it feels more broken because it has less content, communities have less subs. so it can feel like more repetition when you encounter dupplicated posts. also, if you use mobile version that has for example lemmy.ml and . world there is even more reposting most of my time at reddit i spend at my sub page and maybe once or twice encountered duplicates, hot page was different story

  • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Better solution would be to introduce community collections. I’d love to be able to group “gaming” communities from 5 different servers into one and explore it that way.

  • NorwegianBlues
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Tags is a cool idea to help users find posts or communities on specific topics.

    But taking away the different communities on the same topic is misunderstanding one of the key benefits of the fediverse over Reddit. I might want to talk about horses in a different way, with different people, operating under different rules, to the way others might want to talk about horses. The fediverse allows that, without having RealHorseTalk and RealRealHorseTalk nonsense.

    Better UI and categorisation tools, yes. That’ll help make sense of this for new users. But don’t take away an actually positive aspect of the fediverse just to make it look more like Reddit.

    • Whooping_Seal
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is exactly how i felt reading the article, part of the point is to empower users to be able to make a community on a different instance if the first instance has poor moderation, a crazy admin, or just isn’t the vibe you’re lookimg for.

      I think a better solution is something similar to multiredits, where users can group communities together on their own. Which also opens up opportunities for someone to view only tangentially related feeds in the same view (i.e c/news and c/canada, or c/technology and c/linux)

      • Protoknuckles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Maybe even allow instances to generate their own community groups you could tap into? So if I’m on lemmy.world, I could see a proposed “gaming” group that lumps together local gaming communities with cherry picked communities from other instances. I think a wealth of options here will be key. Let me see the group, and see what community it is originally from if I want. And then if I notice that one community keeps posting nonsense, allow me to block just that community (like I can now) from the group.

        I’m also waiting to be able to block whole instances, but I believe that will come.

  • pruwyben@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The part about instances moderating content they receive seems like an issue. Every instance, including small ones run by one person, will go from moderating their local communities to basically moderating every community anyone on the server reads, which probably includes a lot of very large and active ones (larger than any current ones, since they’ll basically be several existing communities combined).

  • iaamp@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    While OP has a point regarding a potential problem, the term ‘fundamentally broken’ is an absolute overstatement. At most, it could be stated that Lemmy/kbin might not be feature complete yet. And i expect, given the crowd sourced nature of it, that it will dynamically evolve into our users combined needs. No need to abandon it!

    Now about the actual point: as others have mentioned, the way Lemmy handles multiple subs on same topic on different instances is good. The communities are easily differentiable via the instance prefix, and if i want both, i can simple subscribe to both, and will see the posts from both in my feed.

    I don’t like the tag idea, because such global consensus about what e.g. a horse is might work for a horse, but not for other terms like ‘politics’, which would depend on the jnstance. If i see a politics sub on an italian instance, i expect it to be mostly about italian politics and related world politics, which is good.

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

    Local communities have a purpose. I live in Northwest Arkansas, a vibrant, slightly more liberal region of the state. I can envision a hyper local instance for all things NWA. For example, a community on trails and trail riding/hiking would focus on the area’s trail system instead of the general topic.

    Now, I might want to subscribe to both the NWA trails community as well as the mote general purpose “global” trails community. So, having them distinct in some way is helpful.

    Maybe it makes sense to have local communities that function as “satellites” of the global community of the same name. In this model, I could post to NWA trails and optionally choose to have my post broadcasted or cross-posted to the global community.

    In the USENET era, we solved the problem with a hierarchical name space. Hierarchies are great, as long as everyone agrees on the structure. The problem is that most hierarchies are completely arbitrary. We would need a consensus group, like the Big-8, ICANN, or IETF that could manage the global community name space. This shouldn’t stop a competing group from standing up a separate, independent global namespace, though.

    Maybe the ETA of the global namespace is past. Maybe there are better ways to achieve these goals today.