this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2023
242 points (80.7% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
566 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Beehaw seemed too fast and heavyhanded with defederating a while back. IMO, defederation is really a "last resort" style of option, not a "first response," so Beehaw using it essentially as a "first response" to some of the bigger instances kinda told me that Beehaw wanted to be off on an island by itself. Like it wanted to be a private forum instead of a Lemmy instance.
I don't miss Beehaw, and Beehaw disappearing from Lemmy wouldn't matter to me, because as far as I am concerned it kinda already did that.
The purpose of Lemmy is to be open and connected, not a private walled garden. If it doesn't fit what you want, then use something else.
Basically, what is there for 90% of Lemmy users to miss, if you effectively banned 90% of Lemmy users by defederating the biggest instances in the first place? They already dont interact or see your content, unless they're using multiple accounts, which would be no different if Beehaw wasnt a Lemmy instance at all.