Open source or GTFO. :)

Seriously, Lemmy is AGPL. Any client you do and any functionality you build on top of it must be AGPL as well.

Now I am confused, are you able to make changes to the Lemmy codebase? A fork? If you want to find a way to fund development, why not just work with the current team?

As a concept, it could be a valid approach. But you need to put actual numbers to see if things make sense:

• What would be the monthly membership fee?
• What would be a reasonable SLA? If there is an outage on a Friday night, are the members okay if they wait until Monday to get it back someone online?
• What do you think is a good hour rate to pay for an admin?
• What should you pay for someone to stay on call?
• Can I run bots? How many? Does each bot count as a separate account?

I think you’ll see that as soon as you start asking people to put money and to feel like they “own” it, the demands will increase and so will the costs.

For reference, the one coop I am somewhat familiar is from Mastodon: cosocial.ca. Each member pays CA$50/year for an account. I think this is particularly too expensive. There are other cheaper “commercial” alternatives that charge less:

• omg.lol offers mastodon and some other services, for $20/year
• mastodon.green offers accounts at $2/month
• Communick offers Mastodon/Lemmy/Funkwhale/Matrix accounts for $29/year (Disclosure, I’m founder)

Ok, which part of “multiple metrics” is not clear here?

Every risk analysis will have multiple factors. The idea is not to always have an absolute perfect ranking system, but to build a classifier that is accurate enough to filter most of the crap.

Email spam filters are not perfect, but no one inbox is drowning in useless crap like we used to have 20 years ago. Social media bots are presenting the same type of challenge, why can’t we solve it in the same way?

Platforms like Reddit and Tumblr need to optimize for growth. We need to have growth, but it is does not be optimized for it.

Yeah, things will work like a little elitist club, but all newcomers need to do is find someone who is willing to vouch for them.

Just add “account age” to the list of metrics when evaluating their trust rank. Any account that is less than a week old has a default score of zero.

Why does have it to be one or the other?

Why not use all these different metrics to build a recommendation system?

Well, I am on record saying that we should get rid of one-dimensional voting systems so I see your point.

But if anything, there is nothing stopping us from using both metrics (and potentially more) to build our feed.

That would be only true if people only marked that they trust people that conform with their worldview.

The indieweb already has an answer for this: Web of Trust. Part of everyone social graph should include a list of accounts that they trust and that they do not trust. With this you can easily create some form of ranking system where bots get silenced or ignored.

Would you like to bring this to https://nfl.community? I was thinking of having separate communities for highlights and memes as well.

How is that an answer to my question?

Oh, I guess I’ll bite…

If ads are not acceptable ever, please tell me how you think people should be supported.

• Crowdfunding is not enough.
• The culture is to reject any type of business, even when it’s a small mom-and-pop shop, or an indie dev.
• Co-ops could work, but (usually) require some level of affinity between the members (e.g: people from the same geographical region or artists working on some specific style/school) or they require some rich benefactor to bootstrap the venture.

Unless you are expecting people to just provide you free content forever, what do you suggest?

I honestly do not get it. Look at the pinned post: “Creating a new community is easy, but to get people on board, you need to create some content.”

Please, let’s not get into this habit of creating communities without having any clear purpose. It only makes things look even deader than they already are.

I use Sponsorblock, enjoy it, and promote it whenever appropriate… but do we really a whole community for that? What do you want to talk about it there?

You are choosing to ignore the rationale for the name:

• visually stimulating pictures
• lacking deeper meaning
• poor substitute or connection with the actual object/activity

“Best”, “Awesome”, “Aww” and any other suggestions that I’ve heard do not convey these ideas. And to me these ideas must be expressed. If you can come up with anything that can succinctly make these points across without resorting to porn/fetish analogies, then I will gladly consider them. But if you just want me to change it because it offends your sensibilities, then I am sorry but I will simply ignore you.

“Best Guitar Pics” is dull and completely unimaginative. It’s the “Microsoft Approach of Naming Products ™”; which does not allow itself to take any risks and ends up being soulless, corporate, empty. Or to use a more contemporary reference: it’s the type of slop that ChatGPT would produce if someone asked “suggest a name for a community for people to share pictures of guitars”.

Yeah, it’s a bit self-serving. Thing is, I could not think of other term to convey this idea as succinctly. Maybe “Fetish” would be better, but it would still carry sexual connotations.

The “implied perverse thrill” seems a bit of projection on your part, and the idea of “visually appealing/stimulating images that have no context and at best provide a simulacrum of interest in the object or activity” is a very good definition of porn.

• https://feddit.nu/comment/10037933
• https://communick.news/comment/2944439

Thank you! Fixed now.