Fediverse

28549 readers

575 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to [email protected]!

Rules

Posts must be on topic.
Be respectful of others.
Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration), Search Lemmy

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

3641

Second largest Lemmy instance preemptively un-friends Facebook (lemmy.ml)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/fediverse

852 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Lemmy.ml has now blocked Threads.net

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] R51 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If they add user-level defed, I'd be pretty on board with defederation being used for stuff like bot farms.

As it stands, with the current lack of user-level defed-- defederating is a server/user-whitelist, server-blacklist function.

Ideally I think it should be a server/user-whitelist, user-blacklist function, where a server-blacklist is reserved for botfarms/illegal content.

[–] HelloHotel 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

more ideally would be as many levels of granular control as possable for users and their clients.

However Servers ghould get

whitelist/blacklist of users
blacklist/whitelist of communities (prevents blocking servers for just their groups)
blacklist/whitelist of servers
server federation

The point is to blacklist as specific as needed, EX: dont block lemmy dot Marxist Lennonists just its extremist communities (ml admins have a ~~communism~~ chinaphile problem)