this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2026
356 points (98.6% liked)
Fediverse
43468 readers
189 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, Mbin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It doesn't even Include https://lemmy.today/ that has no defederation or blocking at all, and has never had, since the admin feels it's up to the user and not the admin to decide these things. You know, free and open internet, remember?
Also one of the best themes of all Lemmy instances if you ask me.
You gotta ask the OOP about that, but my guess is, in a graph that shows instances that defederate, why include an instance that doesn't?
I see your point I guess. Perhaps defederation is something that users want, and then they are happy to see who does it the most?
Im not like that myself, but I can see the point.
Because it lets you see how common or uncommon defederations are relative to the total set of all instances (or at least, all minus the long tail of very-low-user-count ones). And although it would make the graph larger, it would also make it sparse and IMO that would also be easier to read.
It could also give a misleading impression that all instances defederate or are defederated by somebody, making people think it's more common than it actually is. (Or maybe not doing that, if you include all^ish^ instances and it still ends up being not very sparse.)
Came here to say that!
I can't comprehend why people would join instances in the list. If you don't like a particular instance, just hop into the user settings and block it! Why let others set your blocklist?
because it's less work.
Doesn't take much normally. But still, I think Lemmy would surely benefit from adding custom filter lists that users can enable or disable at will.
The first and most obvious is that (last I checked on Lemmy) per-user instance blocks only block posts, not comments. This means that for truly spammy instances (cough Hexbear cough) it requires an instance-wide block to achieve.
Secondly, I would argue it is the same as any other reason to choose an instance. That being, I have to generally like the vibe and agree with the way it's run. For example, I have to agree with the instance rules and trust the admins to moderate them. This is an extension of that.
In the case of lemmy.ca specifically, I would say every major defederation I know of has been cast to a community vote and has had solid reasoning behind it. It comes back to trust and matching opinions: I (currently) trust the admin team to have reasonable defederations as they have matched or been similar to my opinions in the past.
I enjoy not having to self-moderate my experience outside of individual users or rare cases. Choosing an instance that generally aligns with your views allows your admin team to do some moderation for you.
Might be frontend-dependent, but it's certainly an issue if comments are not filtered the same way.
Otherwise, alright, I see your point!
Besides ideology, preferences, bot filtering, or content, there’s also the matter of blocking things like CSAM, gore, etc. Lemmy proposes to not only factor in user preferences but also to properly curate the content via its moderators.
Honestly, that's one thing I've never ever seen on the Fediverse, while having seen plenty in conventional social media.
It's fair that some moderation action might be necessary going forward, but I don't see this problem exist at a current scale.