โฒ 292 โผ Beehaw defederating effective immediately from lemmy.world and sh.itjust.works (beehaw.org) submitted 3 years ago by gary@lemmy.world to c/lemmyworld@lemmy.world 284 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[โ] mintopiasystem@lemmygrad.ml 41 points 3 years ago (2 children) Beehaw leadership really seem hellbent on isolating Beehaw from the entire rest of the fediverse. permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [โ] denemdenem@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago Just like a real beehive is separated from the real world permalink fedilink source parent [โ] spaduf@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) In the information thread over on beehaw the moderators specifically state that their ideal is a system wherein they can see and interact with other instances content while disallowing outsiders to see and interact with their content. I actually think under a system where users of other instances can apply to be allowed on beehaw this is a pretty significant gain of function for the threadiverse. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [โ] ChemicalRascal@lemmy.world 28 points 3 years ago (1 child) Urgh, but that's gross and power-trippy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] dopwop@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [โ] ChemicalRascal@lemmy.world 14 points 3 years ago (1 child) You have to do the former, regardless of if you do the latter. The issue I have is that it isn't really compatible with the idea of having a big social media network. If they wanted to make a "safe space", well, doing that via Lemmy -- or any federated platform -- wasn't the right choice. It'd be like trying to make a "safe space" on Reddit. The idea just doesn't make sense. It's too inherently open, too public, for that to be viable. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [โ] HiddenTower@lemmy.world 13 points 3 years ago doing that via Lemmy โ or any federated platform โ wasnโt the right choice. Yeah, feels like they picked the wrong technology for their community. A phpBB style forum with isolated signup & long-developed moderation tools might have been better for what they want. permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] denemdenem@lemmy.world 1 point 3 years ago Just like a real beehive is separated from the real world permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] spaduf@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 point 3 years ago (1 child) In the information thread over on beehaw the moderators specifically state that their ideal is a system wherein they can see and interact with other instances content while disallowing outsiders to see and interact with their content. I actually think under a system where users of other instances can apply to be allowed on beehaw this is a pretty significant gain of function for the threadiverse. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [โ] ChemicalRascal@lemmy.world 28 points 3 years ago (1 child) Urgh, but that's gross and power-trippy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] dopwop@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [โ] ChemicalRascal@lemmy.world 14 points 3 years ago (1 child) You have to do the former, regardless of if you do the latter. The issue I have is that it isn't really compatible with the idea of having a big social media network. If they wanted to make a "safe space", well, doing that via Lemmy -- or any federated platform -- wasn't the right choice. It'd be like trying to make a "safe space" on Reddit. The idea just doesn't make sense. It's too inherently open, too public, for that to be viable. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [โ] HiddenTower@lemmy.world 13 points 3 years ago doing that via Lemmy โ or any federated platform โ wasnโt the right choice. Yeah, feels like they picked the wrong technology for their community. A phpBB style forum with isolated signup & long-developed moderation tools might have been better for what they want. permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] ChemicalRascal@lemmy.world 28 points 3 years ago (1 child) Urgh, but that's gross and power-trippy. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] dopwop@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [โ] ChemicalRascal@lemmy.world 14 points 3 years ago (1 child) You have to do the former, regardless of if you do the latter. The issue I have is that it isn't really compatible with the idea of having a big social media network. If they wanted to make a "safe space", well, doing that via Lemmy -- or any federated platform -- wasn't the right choice. It'd be like trying to make a "safe space" on Reddit. The idea just doesn't make sense. It's too inherently open, too public, for that to be viable. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [โ] HiddenTower@lemmy.world 13 points 3 years ago doing that via Lemmy โ or any federated platform โ wasnโt the right choice. Yeah, feels like they picked the wrong technology for their community. A phpBB style forum with isolated signup & long-developed moderation tools might have been better for what they want. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] dopwop@lemmy.world 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [โ] ChemicalRascal@lemmy.world 14 points 3 years ago (1 child) You have to do the former, regardless of if you do the latter. The issue I have is that it isn't really compatible with the idea of having a big social media network. If they wanted to make a "safe space", well, doing that via Lemmy -- or any federated platform -- wasn't the right choice. It'd be like trying to make a "safe space" on Reddit. The idea just doesn't make sense. It's too inherently open, too public, for that to be viable. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [โ] HiddenTower@lemmy.world 13 points 3 years ago doing that via Lemmy โ or any federated platform โ wasnโt the right choice. Yeah, feels like they picked the wrong technology for their community. A phpBB style forum with isolated signup & long-developed moderation tools might have been better for what they want. permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] ChemicalRascal@lemmy.world 14 points 3 years ago (1 child) You have to do the former, regardless of if you do the latter. The issue I have is that it isn't really compatible with the idea of having a big social media network. If they wanted to make a "safe space", well, doing that via Lemmy -- or any federated platform -- wasn't the right choice. It'd be like trying to make a "safe space" on Reddit. The idea just doesn't make sense. It's too inherently open, too public, for that to be viable. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [โ] HiddenTower@lemmy.world 13 points 3 years ago doing that via Lemmy โ or any federated platform โ wasnโt the right choice. Yeah, feels like they picked the wrong technology for their community. A phpBB style forum with isolated signup & long-developed moderation tools might have been better for what they want. permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] HiddenTower@lemmy.world 13 points 3 years ago doing that via Lemmy โ or any federated platform โ wasnโt the right choice. Yeah, feels like they picked the wrong technology for their community. A phpBB style forum with isolated signup & long-developed moderation tools might have been better for what they want. permalink fedilink source parent