𝕊𝕚𝕤𝕪𝕡𝕙𝕖𝕒𝕟

A little insane, but in a good way.

Why this name?

  • 25 Posts
  • 62 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

help-circle


  • “Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes.”

    Companies like Meta poison everything they touch. They are a deeply evil, psychopathic organization. They are responsible for causing extremely harmful runaway effects in human society that I’m not even sure are possible to fix. The very reason for Lemmy’s recent popularity is that people are fed up with the “if something is free, you aren’t the user, you are the product” situation and its consequences (see Reddit vs. /u/spez).

    Their intent to federate is a blatantly obvious attempt at an “embrace, extend, extinguish” strategy - I’m surprised anyone seriously considers federating with them. They need users to solve the “chicken and egg” problem and joining the fediverse would be an easy way for them to populate their service with content. Their motivations are obviously and transparently malicious and self-serving. They don’t care about the goals and values of the fediverse at all, all they see is an easy way to gain initial users and content. At the first moment federation will be more inconvenient than useful to them, after they sucked all the profit they could out of it, they will drop the entire thing like a hot potato, and we will be left in the dust.

    I personally like this instance very much, and I’ve been putting hours and hours of work into building the AUAI community since the day I joined. But I wouldn’t hesitate for a second before deleting my account and never looking back if the community here decided to federate with Meta.

    EDIT: another explanation of why they want to join the fediverse





  • First, I’d like to thank @Ategon for their work on these icons and also for running this poll to determine what people who care about the issue want.

    It’s no secret that I vastly preferred the “All Unified” option - the coherent visual identity would not only help recognition across different instances, but it would also strengthen the community and the sense of belonging on this instance.

    With this in mind, I find myself somewhat puzzled by the this remark in the post:

    Community mods though have the final say in what their community icon looks like and can choose not to follow this result if they want

    While the question of icons might seem minor (maybe even trivial), allowing this would set a precedent that undermines the effectiveness of such polls in the future. Everyone who cared about the issue had the opportunity to vote for an entire week, and the “All Unified” option won by an overwhelming majority.

    If even one mod disregarded this result, it would run counter to the result of the poll, effectively making the end state undesirable for the supporters of any of the options: the icons wouldn’t be “all unified”, the “general unified” option wouldn’t happen either because at least some language-specific communities would also have the unified icon, and obviously, “no unified style” voters would be dissatisfied too.

















  • I have a question. If these were the final results (in descending order of votes):

    • x1 votes for UBP icons for non-language-specific communities
    • y1 votes for UBP everywhere
    • y2 votes for colorful UBP everywhere
    • x2 votes for colorful UBP icons for non-language-specific communities
    • z votes for no UBP icons

    Where y1 + y2 > x1 + x2, so more people wanted UBP everywhere but because of the two independent options (where to use them and what color), their votes got fragmented, what is the right course of action?

    I think it would have been better to have two polls, one about the question of using visually consistent icons and another one about what they should look like.