Communities on different instances about the same topic should have the option to essentially federate so a post on one appears on all of them and opening any of them shows you the comments from all of them. This way when lemmy.world is down its not a big deal because posting to any news community federates to all of the communities instead of barely having people see your post. Federation could be decided by the community mods and the comments can have a little “/c/[email protected]” on it so you know which community the comment was originally posted on.

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

[–] cerevant 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, and the difference between Beehw and Lemmy.world is why. Different people have different views about moderation and what is acceptable content.

There are two solutions to the real problem of duplicate content:

Multireddit - like functionality for grouping similar content.
Making crossposting a reference to the original post, not a copy. Mods would need to be able to block crossposts from specific communities, and remove crossposts to their sub.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

These are solvable technical issues.

If community mods on different servers saw they have similar moderation guidelines, they could agree to federate. If they diverge in the future or disagree, they could defederate. Just like instances can defederate from previously federated servers today. It would be no more or less disruptive than defederation is today.

Heck, if done thoughtfully, it could even allow cross moderation, multiplying the number of mods for like-minded communities. The only mods who wouldn't appreciate that are the egotistical, power hungry, Redditish mods.

[–] cerevant -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If the mods can agree on policy, there is absolutely no reason to have two communities. Shut one down and use the other.

Edit: can someone explain to me what the difference between synchronizing two communities and subscribing to a federated community is? I mean, that’s exactly the point of federation.

[–] YourHuckleberry 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That system makes the instance a single-point-of-failure for the whole community, which has been a big problem lately. If communities could easily be multi-instance they would have redundancy. That seems like a good reason to me.

[–] cerevant 2 points 1 year ago

While I agree there should be functionality to propagate changes to a community between instances when the host is offline, there is no practical way to share administrative control of a community. Any decision by an administrator to sanction a community or defederate an instance will just result in exactly the fragmentation you fear.

The real solution is for small groups of communities with similar interests to gather on separate instances with few or no users. Meanwhile, other instances gather users with few or no local communities. This maximizes the benefits of cacheing community content while minimizing the impact of defederation. If a community host can no longer be maintained by its owner, that ownership can be easily transferred without transferring the burden of hosting hundreds of communities or supporting user logins.