Is this a Piefed.social question, or Piefed (the software) question? If it’s the latter, I think any tools that allow administrators to identify bots/bot-like accounts are useful. If it’s the former, I say ban 'em all and keep the instance authentic (while acknowledging that my account is from elsewhere).

I tried out Bazzite with an Nvidia 40-series card last year and performance was the same as Windows for everything I tested

All things being equal I would go with AMD too, but if I was OP I certainly wouldn’t turn down a good deal on an Nvidia card if one presented itself.

“Auto-defederate from any instance defederated by” is a great feature for new admins getting a new instance set up! It’s like forking the experience of an existing instance.

My favorite mod @ValueSubtracted@startrek.website moved here but also fuck spez.

EDIT:

Absolutely Amazing work here. Tesseract should strongly be considered as a default UX.

I think the current methodology skews the data; consider that an instance federated with say, Hexbear, is probably going to have significantly more individual and community bans than an instance who only made 5-6 bans before recognizing the pattern and blocking the instance.

If the goal of this study is to see which places most aggressively moderate their content, you’re actually getting somewhat of the reverse.

Very interesting stuff! Defederations should count as a ban of all instance users, imo.

When did Trump or Biden attack the country of Iraq? Iraq is a US strategic partner and the US basically pays for their entire military. Even claiming Obama attacked the nation of Iraq is a big overreach, imo.

If anyone else was confused, this is Rochester New Hampshire, a city of ~30K people and the 4th largest American Rochester.

More mods and admins on Fedi need to step up and take bolder action, imo. Whether intentional or not, a mods inaction will often set the tone for a given community more than their actions.

Imagine the community you mod meets in person and someone is being obnoxious and disruptive. A new attendee is not going to speak up, they’re going to look to you for guidance. If you allow unwelcoming behavior to persist, then attendees learn that being loud is how to get noticed, and if they don’t want to be loud (as many of us don’t) they’ll just stop going.

Learning that the Lemmy.world team will capitulate to whatever it’s loudest users want explains a LOT.

This. The way I see it, if an admin can’t (or won’t) moderate their users, the problem can only get worse.

Lemmy is just software that anyone can use. Each Lemmy instance with open sign ups has their own rules. But even so- there would be no way of knowing which Lemmy users are equivalent to any reddit user without the user itself making it known.

Yep. IMO, the experience of using social media was pretty good (far from perfect but pretty good) going into 2014, but 2014 set in motion what became 2015. When gamergate-style ““debate”” tactics took over well, everything.

EDIT: And more importantly those tactics weren’t banned by most subreddits

I did the same. Thank goodness for personal block lists.

Oh yes, I believe it is the responsibility of instance admins, as I believe it is the responsibility of the Reddit admins too. And if Steve Huffman wants Reddit to be a pro gamergate right wing website he absolutely has that right. What I wanted to highlight is that Reddit has a long history of enforcing their policies selectively in ways that just-so-happen to allow right wing propagandists free access to everyone else’s communities.

The_Donald encouraging violence against women? “We allow all ideas no matter how unpopular”.

The creator of KotakuInAction removes posts encouraging violence against women? That crosses a line!

If someone creates a community about topic A and removes posts about topic B, that is not “subverting”.