I’m super impressed by the features I’m discovering using Piefed! I’m going to be experimenting a lot with the keyword filter particularly. Here are some ideas we might add to make Piefed even better. Share you own in the replies.

Some of these options where too long to make it a poll.

    • CyberSage@piefed.socialOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      5 days ago

      My ideal default would be, users have to subscribe to vote, because drive-by downvotes are very common, and keep niche communities from getting anywhere in the All feed.

      • chromodynamic@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 days ago

        Another reason is to avoid the Reddit problem of people upvoting of off-topic posts by people who don’t pay attention to what community it’s posted in. I don’t think Piefed/Lemmy/etc. has those kind of users (yet) but it’s good future-proofing.

        • Rimu@piefed.socialM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          5 days ago

          Currently the most popular suggestion is to have a "upvote this post and all it’s cross posts” function, which would make that problem worse…

          • chromodynamic@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            Yeah, I’m not sure why people want that. In all honestly I wouldn’t implement it if it were me, but if you do I suggest restricting it to communities with the same topic, or maybe even restricting it to communities with the exact same name.

            • INeedMana@piefed.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              I’m not sure why people want that

              There often are multiple communities for the same thing. Rust for example. The result is that in some interest fields posts are often cross-posted to a bunch of same communities. With Piefed displaying all comments from all cross-posts, there is little need to switch between communities. But if the post is good, I feel it should receive a vote not only in the community that just happened to be on top of the feed

      • socsa@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        Why not just remove down votes from the post ranking algorithms entirely, since they seem to be the cause of a bunch of consternation anyway?

      • Skavau@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        Eh, a good community owner will catch the repeat downvoters and ban them. It does exist, but if you’re on top of your community you will be able to stop it.

        • socsa@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          I do not want people banned for voting activity. How is this even an idea with traction? Votes are not real, they can’t hurt you. If we are so concerned about the impact of down votes on communities then just remove them from the rank calculations.

          If we need to ban people for using the goddamn site mechanics then perhaps those mechanics are just flawed.

          • Skavau@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            I do not want people banned for voting activity. How is this even an idea with traction?

            I’ve already explained this, because people value a high-trust community culture. People don’t like it when bots, or even individual accounts go to a community and downvote everything on there and keep doing it because they can. It can be corrosive and damaging to new communities viability.

            If we are so concerned about the impact of down votes on communities then just remove them from the rank calculations.

            That’s another option, but this is what the wider fediverse has gone with currently - regarding downvotes as credible when used fairly.

            But again, it’s up to community moderators here - not instance owners. Some communities won’t care, some will only care if its repeated downvote activity with no interaction, and others will be really bad about it.

            • socsa@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              Right, so we are going to twist ourselves in circles and allow/enable censorship just for using the site, over a single mechanic which doesn’t need to impact anything in the first place? Am I taking crazy pills here? This is such a dumb issue with an easy and obvious solution.

              “It’s really annoying how this door shocks me every time I use it. I could just disconnect the power source, but whining about it is easier.”

              • Skavau@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                4 days ago

                Right, so we are going to twist ourselves in circles and allow/enable censorship just for using the site, over a single mechanic which doesn’t need to impact anything in the first place?

                People already fairly and unfairly censored all over the website by community owners for how they use a community. There are unjust bans all the time.

                Am I taking crazy pills here? This is such a dumb issue with an easy and obvious solution.

                Removing downvotes would also have an impact on how content trends, so its not quite as easy as you’re alleging here.

                Notably a handful of instances do disable downvotes, like blahaj if I recall.

                • socsa@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  I’m not saying disable down votes. I’m saying make them placebos. Let people “do an engagement” or whatever to give them a sense of pride and accomplishment, but just eliminate them from the actual engagement calculation. There are plenty of other metrics for ranking posts.

                  • Skavau@piefed.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    4 days ago

                    Well all the same, visible or not - it would still have an impact as ragebait posts would trend. I don’t think that upvote/downvote system myself is nuanced enough anyway, but whilst we have it, it is what it is.

        • OpenStars@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          Not if always done by what looks to be random accounts, and also that takes effort, which gets harder as a community grows in size.

          • Skavau@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 days ago

            Yeah, I suppose in my experience - most of the downvoters that caused problems were persistent. You’ll never stop downvote noise though. But that also goes for upvote noise.

            • OpenStars@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              Unless you limit all votes to only count from subscribers. It would not stop dedicated trolls who simply subscribe purely in order to manipulate votes, but it would halt all casual drive-by noise.

              • Skavau@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 days ago

                I mean if you limited votes purely to subscribers as a new community, you’d get nowhere because no post would trend for anyone new to find the community.

                • OpenStars@piefed.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  5 days ago

                  Hrm… might still be worth it?

                  Or switch a community only after it increases to a certain size or at least passes an age threshold.

                  Or only allow votes from “trusted” instances, where moderation practices are actually enforced and serial abusers are detected and banned.

                  • Skavau@piefed.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    5 days ago

                    I think it should be completely up to community owners. I have no problem with them being able to make that choice.