Skavau

I support the right of every instance on Lemmy to build how they want, transparently. As you can see my main account is on .today and not .world or sh.itjust.works.

My point here is that piefed.social has pretty simular culture to lemmy.world or sh.itjust.works.

I have some real concerns about what’s considered authoritarian, considering…

Oof. That’s some social credit sounding shit right there.

Its much simpler than that. Lemmy has a spam problem. People coming in to just make shill communities selling a service or product or spamming advert posts across communities.

They usually get downvoted, but I can use Piefeds admin tools to filter for downvoted posts by new accounts. This usually catches most spammers like that. I can then ban them from piefed.social and pass that on to Lemmy admins.

A lot of Day 1 trolls are caught like this too.

I understand, not always, but most heavily downvoted accounts tend to be people looking for fights everywhere, people with long community and instance banlists etc.

4chan Filter – Flags content from 4chan for review.

This can be turned off by other instances.

And there seems to be some confusion in some of the excerpts there because it is mostly referring to what piefed.social does, and not incumbent on all other instances to do so. It also looks unfinished.

Piefed literally sees what lemmy.world or sh.itjust.works else sees on the fediverse.

Okay, fair enough. I’d actually argue that the field doesn’t really make much sense to new users in the first place without context. “Good” is obviously loaded with bias preference in this context, but “Minimal” doesnt’ necessarily convey an negative opinion just based on the word itself. I could ask him to add more instances here (although the fascist instances that I know of here are so minor and obscure that they likely didn’t enter his mind - except hilariouschaos) and/or change the wording and add a description so its meaningful.

Also to detach the code so other join.piefed pages can rip it out or isolate their own instances they suggest disfavour towards.

This is problematic for a number of reasons, most of all is that this rating that it generates is NOT transparent to the user. This page is used on PieFeds main page when you go to register, it’s part of the instance picker. The defederation rating under More is where this shows up. For instance, this means that instances like anarchist.nexus have a “OK” rating but instances like multiverse.soulism.net have a “GOOD” rating.

https://piefed.social/auth/instance_chooser

The only measurements here seem to be stability.

“These servers are ordered by speed so it may vary depending on time of day, etc”

Hexbear and Lemmygrad aren’t Lemmy.ml. I never claimed that hexbear and lemmygrad aren’t defederated by default.

The claim you’re linking to though also alleges that lemmy.ml is automatically defederated, and that if you wipe all defederations entirely it will repopulate them back.

Dude, I specifically spoke to wjs (one of the main contributors to this project) about this claim - and he examined the code. It doesn’t do what you claim it does. That quote is directly from him. Hexbear and Lemmygrad are automatically defederated but if you remove them and them remove all the defederations entirely, it won’t just repopulate them with those instances and automatically add lemmy.ml.

Lemmy.ml was never a default in the first place when it comes to defederation. Piefed.social doesn’t even defederate lemmy.ml.

PieFed defederates from Hexbear.net, Lemmygrad.ml, and Lemmy.ml out of the box.

Can you tell me why you keep claiming this when I’ve specifically said this is not the case here?

"And no, it does not defederate from lemmy.ml out of the box. You are completely misunderstanding that code. I have already addressed this here.

“Alright, it doesn’t do any defederation, this function just controls what the api reports. It will list which of those four instances the instance is defederated from but that doesn’t look like it is actually used anywhere to do something…let me grab you links here is where piefed digests this api endpoint to populate the instance_chooser table, and the defed_list field isn’t actually used at all”

I’ll bring it up.

It can be turned off. Not all Piefed instances have it on.

Also, I doubt that skavau is correct that if we all used piefed, you wouldn’t be able to reply to users on other instances if they have blocked you. A quick look at the code hasn’t proven me wrong, but I’ll make two accounts on piefed instances and test.

That’s a bug, if so. As I have spoken to Rimu about this and he said that blocking is specifically meant to prevent the blocked user from replying to the other user.

Absolutely and now even goat is trying to argue their ignorance from the comm outside of this thread so I’m sure I’ll be getting lots of hate soon enough from others.

What sort of hate are you anticipating?

Again last I’m saying about this only bringing up as Goat is going to end up targeting me know, but sure ignore everything that has been brought up

I don’t feel like I’ve ignored anything at all in this chain.

Oi, cool it. I don’t want to just expel someone from piefed.social for that - but don’t be hurling comments like that.

I see again this is useless as you can’t see anything past piefed positives and repetitively ignore the point to focus on specific unrelated specifics such as as alt accounts downvoting

You are alleging here that there is already a user, or bloc of users that organise downvote raids against particular users or communities or instances and that their home instances - or the fediverse more broadly in the form of defederating their home instance, does nothing.

You bought this up in reference, to function as opposition to my claim that an instance that engaged in deliberate vote brigading would find itself potentially defederated. So I am effectively asking for receipts for your allegation.

rather than dedicating an entire comm towards hate.

Are you arguing that MeanwhileOnGrad should be shut down by the sh.itjust.works mods?

Because I’m not going to search his entire history when it’s one of his top comments, and the comment even reflects his entire philosophy

So you made an assumption because that particular comment of his got upvoted a lot. He is not a frequent user of meanwhileongrad.

Got it, only counts if admins actively encouraging and instead of not doing anything about the comm

Again: Can I see a post that has been repeatedly hit by downvotes from goat alts, by the way?

Or that doesn’t count because not within 2 months?

You claimed he “frequents” meanwhileongrad. A comment chain 5 months ago where the context is actually related to allegations against Piefed is hardly evidence of frequenting it. By your logic I am thus a frequent visitor of memes@lemmy.ml.

Because it’s irrelevant to the point if they are downvoting with multiple accounts when using comms to drive users to do it for them. You’re also ignoring the admins of the instance not doing anything for comms doing that exact behavior.

Again, you would have to show some evidence that the actual instance owners are doing this or actively involved. Can I see a post that has been repeatedly hit by downvotes from goat alts, by the way?

And yes rimu frequents Meanwhileongrad

I’ve just tracked back through 2 months of rimus comments and not found a single comment from him on MeanwhileOngrad.

Cool, again not the point when it’s instance admins who are okay with the behavior. Especially if it helps get them traffic and users.

Right, and in this context that would become a defederated instance if they were found as admins to be specifically engaging in that behaviour themselves. If it’s just individuals on the instance acting on their own volition (and I have asked you if goat specifically uses alts to mass-downvote people multiple times across the fediverse - and you haven’t confirmed if he does that).

How is this relevant to him running the comm specifically designed to drive people to attack others. Even in this thread one user, who doesn’t seem to care about the Jordan Lund shit show, even uses the comm to distract from how world handled the situation that most already forgot or didn’t care about. Rimu himself frequenting the same comm and doing exactly the same attacks to others and other instances is why people have so many concerns about piefed. Other instance admins are doing the same

Frequenting what comm? Are you talking about Tankiejerk or MeanwhileInGrad? I’ve never seen Rimu comment there ever.

Simply looking at frequency and speed.

Trolls are not always frequent at all.

Where did I say he was, it was an example of admins being okay with terrible behavior because they do it for them.

Jordan Lund just runs some local lemmy.world communities. Big communities, and maybe he runs them badly - and lemmy.world absolutely took reputational hits for it.

Goat is multiple accounts and runs comms specifically to do exactly that. See meanwhile on grad on shit just works.

Right, but is he a part of the sh.itjust.works administration? Does he use those accounts to double-vote negatively against users he doesn’t like across the fediverse?

But piefed world help them do that. And as long as they upvote equally or more than they downvote would be considered better than those downvoting or that have content being downvoted.

I can assure you that if an instance opened up on piefed that was being used by the administrators of that instance to target a particular user or users with repeated downvotes or instance via multi-accounting or just general bloc downvoting via multiple people that I could call for its defederation.

What ways would you suggest to isolate trolls?

Jordan Lund wasn’t downvote trolling.

Goat is one user. For comparison, do you have an example of someone on the opposite side, or downvoting en masse or drama-baiting for different causes?

Moreover, I would submit that a user downvoting a lot and getting repeatedly banned from other communities and instances for it is quite different to an instance specifically organising downvote raids comprised of multiple users and alt accounts. Does Goat load up alt accounts to downvote?

No, it explains the logic behind the reputation system. The purpose is as I said, to isolate trolls, which 9/10 they absolutely are.

Are the admins of shi.itjust.works specifically openly encouraging and endorsing mass vote manipulation of users or communities on other instances? Or are individuals doing it on their own?

They do, to be sure, but you are severely overemphasising his anti-communist positions and injecting it where there is no obvious connection at all. And having spoken to him, I see no reason to make this connection here at all.

Piefed originally hid the mod logs and upvoting and downvoting data from users. Why? Because Rimu felt it could be used to harass and cause drama. It is likely the same mindset from which the blocklist logic comes from.

He eventually mostly about-turned on this due to most people opposing it.