good morning, Beehaw

this morning we have a survey for you, which will run for approximately three days. it contains three questions on site policy (plus an optional explanation field), and two questions about the site’s current vibe (plus another optional explanation field).

you can find the survey here.


some caveats to this survey

you likely have some priors for how this “should” work, and i would like you to leave those at the door. to be up front:

  • this is not a referendum—it is more like a Wikipedia vote if anything. we’re looking for a consensus or a synthesis of the community’s opinions with the practical limitations we’re working with, not a first-past-the-post winner.
  • this is not (currently) a democracy, and you should not expect public results from this. we talked this part over as an admin team and we don’t see much value in publicly releasing the results of a survey like this. if we do release the results publicly, we’ll be announcing that before it happens.
  • the same caveats just mentioned will apply to any surveys like this into the foreseeable future. i’m sure everyone understands that in online spaces it is very easy to manipulate surveys like this; accordingly, it is not a great idea to take them at complete face value until you can audit votes. since we don’t have a foolproof, private system for doing that yet, these caveats are necessary to make any kind of vote involving site policy work.

(we do eventually want to create a foolproof enough private system, but this is way on the backburner and i’m guessing most of you prefer having an imperfect way to chime in on the site’s direction than none at all until this system is created)

    • millie@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      ·
      1 year ago

      Honestly, I think defederating from some of the major instances is a big part of the reason it’s as nice here as it is. Beehaw doesn’t need to be a giant to have a place and a purpose, and it doesn’t need to be the only Lemmy instance anyone uses either.

      I think we all need to get past this nonsensical idea that everything has to be the biggest to be worthwhile. Nobody goes to a nice local restaurant and wishes they were at McDonald’s. It’s okay to just make something good and let it be. It doesn’t have to explode to monumental proportions, and when it does that’s not really that great a thing.

      Federation is an amazing tool in large part because of defederation. If instances aren’t using both they might as well all be screaming down the same meaningless content firehose, as far as I can tell.

      • magnetosphere @beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Agreed. Having an enormous user base isn’t inherently a good thing. We’re used to thinking that it is, though, because most of our experience is with for-profit websites. For them, that’s how success is measured.

        It’s great if you’re selling advertising space on your site, or if you want the maximum amount of potential customers for other products or services… but for sites like Beehaw, too much is simply too much. Constant growth isn’t worth the trouble.

        The concept people need to adjust to is that we’re interested in quality over quantity. We need enough users to keep the site active and interesting, but beyond that, things just get more complex and harder to moderate.

        • millie@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Absolutely. I feel like the constant competition for growth within capitalism pushes so many toxic ideas on us and this is just one more example. It’s all ego over substance and it doesn’t help anyone. 15 foot high pickup trucks with 3 feet of bed space. Same thing.

        • alyaza [they/she]@beehaw.orgOPM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          1 year ago

          But defederate the main lemmy instance? Self-defeating.

          just to be clear: we don’t think there’s intrinsic value in federating with the largest communities just because they’re large, and we will never federate (or maintain federation) with a community purely on the basis of its size or ostensible contribution to the fediverse’s activity.

            • Seathru@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Your opinion. But fact is, their choice is why some of us are here. Yes, I would like articles posted to lemmy.world to show up on my all feed here; No, I absolutely would not like to see lemmy.world’s entire userbase here. It would overwhelm the small mod team and likely kill the vibe. The slight inconvenience is worth it.

    • jarfil@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lemmy.world is full of people who don’t want to “be nice”, and are happy to drag anyone “to the dark side”.

      If there was a unidirectional way of federating, like “let people from Beehaw participate on LW communities, but don’t allow LW users participate in Beehaw communities”, then it could be a viable option.

      Otherwise, just the (hopefully small) portion of bad actors on LW, would be enough to drown out Beehaw’s communities and overload the mods. There are already signs of mod fatigue on Beehaw even without federating with large instances that used to be “free for all”.

    • lagomorphlecture@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Thr reason given for defederation with world is a lack of adequate moderation tools and open signups on that instance. Given the recent csam attacks on .world I have to say it looks like the admins had a valid point.