On the Lemmy and Kbin Magazine side of things, Threads won’t be a huge threat as most discussion will stay on existing communities/magazines, and most of the same users will be there with some interaction from Threads users.
On the Mastodon and the microblog side of things Threads will be interesting and I think the healthiest option is some server disconnect from Threads and others don’t. What you don’t want is ALL the discussion happening on threads and within threads, Threads should be set up as a gateway to the rest of the Fediverse despite the size difference.
I see what you’re saying, but I really don’t see what Meta stands to gain in the long run from an open fediverse. It just doesn’t seem compatible with their business model to allow users who aren’t on their platform to interact with content created on their platform. They need data so they can sell it to advertisers, and I don’t see how that works when your users can just jump to another instance with no advertisments and access all the same content.
What do you think Meta stands to gain from Activity Pub, and why wouldn’t they just make their own closed protocol? (I am asking in good faith, because I do not really know.)
As I understand it, they’re joining precisely because they’d gain little. By flooding it with their content, any new user would think Fediverse=Threads.
I’ve seen the acronym EEE (Embrace, Expand, Extinguish) thrown a lot in these discussions because it’s a 3-word summary of their presumed strategy.
My question is, what has Threads done to influence Mastodon development so far in a bad way.
lets Say threads is just the mainstream platform of the fediverse. The protocol is all open source, and every one is in control of their servers. If it is federated whats the worse that could happen?
Plus you can always switch to lemmy, firefish, and etc. to try to avoid threads platform wide.
I wouldn't say kbin would be harmed necessarily even if maybe just a tiny bit. A good amount of the users on Lemmy (can't say much about kbin hadn't tried it yet) hate threads. So as an alternative to Mastodon, that would actually more likely score them points not detract from a user perspective.
Most likely, for a user to be on kbin or Lemmy you either come from Reddit, or you come from Mastodon so the users would had likely made up their mind on separating themselfs from major platforms, that likely includes threads.
Counterpoint, what has Meta done to gain even the tiniest bit of the semblance of the doubt. If someone's punched you in the face every time you've knocked on their door, are you really going to knock on it a 15th time? You'd be a fool to expect that time to be any different.
Just like you'd be a fool to expect the overall impact of Meta having their fingers in the Fediverse to be anything other than harmful.
I feel the post doesn't really address my concerns.
Really? You think Threads will take over and rule Mastodon? Threads is its own platform, users on the fediverse can still join Mastodon #servers of their choice and leave. I expect we'l see plenty of anti #threads Mastodon servers pop up. If Threads were to somehow get an influence in Mastodon, just switch to #lemmy switch to #pixelfed switch to #firefish So many choices.
This seems to not really understand the risk Threads poses. Threads is its own platform, yes, but it will dominate the visible content of any instance that federates with it. It's very dangerous to depend on a massive, profit-driven corporation for activity on the fediverse, as the things we value on the fediverse (decentralization, transparency, even distribution of content between instances, etc.) go against the corporation's motives. Meta does not stand to benefit from any of the things we value, and most of the Threads userbase (i.e. casual Instagram users) probably won't notice or care about federation. Meta does benefit if everyone depends on them for content, as then they can pull people to Threads just by defederating. People will choose to go to Threads where the amount of activity is what they're used to over staying on their Mastodon instance after activity has plummeted and they can't see most of the people they follow.
This is a big one. Meta might capture the mainstrean fediverse. Lets just be real the average regular internet user wasn't going to join Mastodon in the first place. Not that they wouldn't want to it just isn't on their list next to #facebook#instagram#tiktok#youtube#discord or even #twitter . Actually I take what Meta is doing as a compliment to the fediverse. Remember Twitter at one time under #elon#elonmusk banned the talk of Mastodon or something like that. Threads might not have our interests at heart but they are already mainstream so why should they not allow their users be federated with us?
Yes, there are definitely a lot of people that the fediverse is just never going to appeal to. But of those who are interested in the fediverse, more will be inclined to join Threads due to it having most of the content & just requiring an Instagram login. There is a pool of people out there who will try out the fediverse if they're introduced to it — that's how we all got here — and if people can interact with the big Mastodon, Kbin, etc. instances from Threads, many will choose to do that when they wouldn't have otherwise.
@ThatOneKirbyMain2568@rob299 Yes. But also Meta's screwed-up moderation systems will be brought to bear against fedi instances. The latter will essentially have to endure a shitty AI-generated smear campaign.
@FinchHaven@ThatOneKirbyMain2568 what I meant by that section you quoted from the post was, if Meta were to influence the development of Mastodon. If you switch to Firefish or others mentioned, you would probably have a more preferred dev team then what could happen to Mastodon with Meta.
I don't think "the development" is what is claimed to be at stake here.
OP is not talking about the software, they're talking about the content. And the content model from Mastodon is not interchangeable with the one from Lemmy, Pixelfed, etc. they serve different purposes and have different models. In fact that's the main interoperatibility barrier between them.
It's like saying that if most people use gmail for email you will switch from email to audio calls to avoid communicating with google's service. As if real time audio were the same thing as sending a message (or as if google was unable to add compatibility with that call service too if they wanted).
One thing you could argue is, instead of switching services, switching to an instance that does defederate if you dont want threads content. But that same argument can be said as well towards those wanting threads federation...
But dont think the point is what does the individual want (if that were the case, just use the option to block threads content for your user, without defederating), the point is what's best for the fediverse. I think people are afraid that something similar to what happened with "google talk" and their embrace of xmpp will repeat.
Personally, I think there's no reason to jump the gun this early... all of this post is based on a lot of weak assumptions. I dont believe that threads content would overwhelm the feeds, and if that were to happen then the software could be tweaked so the contribution of each instance to the feeds can be weighted and made more customizable, for example.
I don’t actually get any of this 😂. Yes, I am that old 😂.
I think I’ll try to explain the working of the Fediverse in simple drawings, add a few instances recommended for certain types of creators, and make a page long FAQ section with stuff like about GDPR requests, etc.
There was a nice image, like a tutorial with Q&As, during the Reddit migration… can’t seem to recall who made it, but it was well explained, in layman’s terms, what the fediverse is. It was aimed at Lemmy, but it could easilly be remade for any other fediverse social media as well (I think the author also released the GIMP file as well). Sure, it’s not perfect, but it gives you a general idea of what the fediverse is.
If someone could remember the image and share it, or a link to where it may reside, that would be great ☺️.
I only know that one time an obscure thing I was talking about here on kbin.social, perhaps as a response to a post on some Lemmy or another, ended up being indexed incredibly quickly by Google regardless of however things are structured in URLs.
This became apparent when I tried to do further research on the topic and I found myself staring at my own comment as federated on yet another Lemmy.
As long as search engines remain as on the ball as whatever happened there, we might actually end up with a repository anyway.
Is there a name for that phenomena? It used to happen to me with reddit.
Especially disappointing for longstanding problems that I would walk away from and return to at a later date. I would of course initiate a renewed effort with a websearch containing key words. I guess in a sufficiently idiosyncratic/unique way that I would find my own thread, but not recognize it. Momentarily get excited like "this person has the precise same problem as I do!" hoping there would be a solution in the thread. Only to realize that the whole thing was a little too framiliar and it was myself, last year, struggling with the same problem having made zero progress.
Do you think that's why you found your own writing? Like if I am trying to research the present question and I do a search with keywords like fediverse repository knowledge lemmy kbin URL search reddit I could imagine finding this because it is an unusual combination of words. But if I were to use totally different phrasing I doubt I would get here.
We do have code reviews in GitHub and discussions on Matrix. We updated the README that reflect our latest way of working. As stated in the comment section we are also working on it in PR: https://github.com/MbinOrg/mbin/pull/34. Feel free to comment on that.
Hmm, that seems like not such a good look from Ernest. According to google translate:
I know, honestly it was on purpose. I noticed that forks sync changes immediately with /kbin. I wanted to check how they deal with this much-announced community-based qualitative code review. Answer: they can't cope. Quite an obvious bug was accepted in PR and domerged into the main branch :P It now works properly on the rifle ;)
Hopefully everyone can play nice and work together productively.
seems like you are saying ernest put thru an intentionally malicious PR to see what would happen? And what happened was exactly what is described? I mean, ya, thats what people will do.
It wasn't entirely intentional, it was actually my mistake. But I held off on pushing the hotfix for a while. It was a development branch, so these kinds of bugs were permissible - in this case, it just changed the order of related posts, nothing serious. It was quite easy to spot and fix. Slow and cautious acceptance of pull requests, something I spent a lot of time on, was the main accusation from the creators of forks. Hastily accepting them was a problem for me. I personally considered a consensus similar to that, but now I see it doesn't make sense. Someone needs to take responsibility. Personally, I believe that forks are the best thing that could have happened to the project.
It is good to really see your true nature now. I'm also think the fork is the best thing that could have happened for the community. It's a pity that you never started a conversation, but instead you still try to do mean things like this.
@melroy I don't think you can really be upset about anyone putting through bad code. According to the philosophy as I understand it, bad code (intentionally so or otherwise) is a useful contribution and you are basically soliciting it. You supposedly have some way other than code review to ensure nothing harmful gets through and it has to do with the reputation of the contributor. Since you already knew @ernest and clearly have a bad opinion of him, how did it happen?
I did not and could not review the PRs themselves. So I am just going on the information as presented here. Sounds like @ernest put through some code (either into kbin or mbin not clear on that) which he knew was not 100% highest quality but which error was not critical or devastating. And that it could easily be found and fixed. Partially he did this to learn more about this governance model. A model which has apparently been developed in direct opposition to his own. Is it approximately accurate?
If so, sounds a bit mischievous at the worst.
I really can't recommend Tyranny of Structurelessness highly enough.
Well I don't have a bad opinion about him (those are your assumptions), we just didn't agree on how a community project would/can work.
If however he did introduce intentionally a bug in kbin, just because of Mbin that's downright childish. The Mbin community does try to test all the incoming PRs (not just kbin sync PRs) on various instances apart from unit-tests, etc. We just do not want to depend on a single maintainer, hence a different way of working in the project.
He saying Mbin can't handle the kbin changes that is just not true (Odpowiedź: nie radzą sobie), at least we try to keep in sync (eg. for API comparability for upcoming mobile clients). But I'll leave it this, I'm not going to waste any more energy. I hope you understand.
Oh c'mon, don't be mad. It's just a wrong sorting of posts, it's in an edge case, and seriously it wasn't intentional. I just wanted to check how such management looks in practice, how many merge accepts are needed, etc. I didn't mean to do anything wrong that could cause harm. I even push the same code to my instance to facilitate your tests ;)
But you're right - that's just my nature. I approach PR with very limited trust, whether they're mine or from others.
I know your approach on PRs. Hence the main reason of the fork. The community does believe in their people and the good in mankind. Only 1 approval is required from another maintainer for now. We are using C4 way of working.
I assure you that I didn't intentionally push incorrect code into the repository. These were my first lines of code in a really long time. I simply got involved in other things that I wanted to finish first, and I noticed the edge case in the meantime, but it wasn't a priority. I saw that you were syncing and I was hoping to benefit a bit from it once you fixed it. I didn't expect the review to happen so quickly. By the way, I was genuinely curious about how this project management method works because, you know, I've always avoided such an approach. Merloy, you know how much I owe you, and I appreciate what you've done for the project, as well as the other Mbin contributors. Our overall visions haven't always been the same, and I think it's great that kbin has been forked. You see for yourself how my work looks until the release - there are many things I'll be refining over time. That's why I've put a hold on all other PRs, and now I want to focus on this.
@ernest@melroy
lol this whole conversation is a microcosm of the open source community. I agree with ernest that forks are great and would add that they show that the open source system is working as intended.
You are right. But was the whole debacle that lead to this fork being made worth it? Wouldn't it have been much better if Ernest had just sorted out all himself and we'd all be working on the same project together now instead of introducing mistakes into forks too see what happens? What a complete waste of time, especially under the current circumstances.
In hindsight maybe we should have responded by saying we merged your mistake intentionally to see how you'd respond.
i am not being serious of course, as that's not our community's nature. Even though it's allowed to gather proof, we (I am quite sure I can speak on behalf of the community here) would never intentionally introduce bad code into software which is being actively used.
Ernest, you have seen me before, pleading for you to change your ways, on all fronts. This, sadly, degrades the faith I have in your project being suitable for being used in production, from a pragmatic point of view. Kbin may be reliable, but you are not.
Ernest said he didn't introduce bad code on purpose:
I assure you that I didn't intentionally push incorrect code into the repository. These were my first lines of code in a really long time. I simply got involved in other things that I wanted to finish first, and I noticed the edge case in the meantime, but it wasn't a priority.
Ernest has said many things in the past and many times has not lived up to his promises. So I doubt this words now. Also he's already contradicted himself on this matter.
Yeah, that's true. Real-life stuff was kinda more important for me at the moment than managing the project.
For me, it's straightforward: I pushed some dev code that wasn't even a complete feature, and it got approved in your pull request. That's why I was advocating for everyone to only merged their own PRs in the /kbin repository – so that each person could take responsibility for their own work. I won't go on about this any further.
Real-life stuff was kinda more important for me at the moment than managing the project.
As it should be, always, for everybody, you won't ever hear me judge you on that, so please don't try to make me look bad by implicitly suggesting I am.
What you failed to do however is delegate, even temporarily, your responsibilities to people you trust. Instead you left people who trusted you dangling, only sporadically feeding them promises you would never fulfill. It seems keeping them on a leash was kinda more important to you than securing the future of kbin.
I won't go on about this any further.
I hope I'll never have to mention this again, so you'll never have to. Which would imply that you'll have come to terms and lived up to your promises, both recent ones and from the past.
Yes, I say this fully aware - there are many things that I have failed at. Much of what I said, I failed to achieve. However, I never wanted to keep people on a leash; I am more of a person who prefers to stay on the sidelines and engage in what brings me the greatest pleasure - coding, just like any other contributor.
Believe me, I tried to delegate tasks, had many private conversations and discussions. Perhaps it wasn't visible from the outside. However, in that mental state, the last thing I wanted to do was resolve conflicts among adults, and it all started to boil down to that. As @BaldProphet mentioned - "microcosm of the open-source community."
Moreover, there were too many different visions of the project, ignoring requests, etc. That's precisely why I decided to temporarily halt development, to secure the future of kbin. It was my decision, and as I mentioned, forking turned out to be the best thing that could happen. As you can see, the differences are not that significant, but it will be easier for all of us - especially since we can always draw inspiration from each other, and I don't think anyone has a problem with that.
However, I still maintain contact with many people, and sometimes they mention to me the attitude of certain individuals on mbin's Matrix - it is at least puzzling. In any case, I want to stay away from that and focus on my work with contributors who understand and prefer my approach.
Believe me, I tried to delegate tasks, had many private conversations and discussions. Perhaps it wasn't visible from the outside
I am sorry but I'm having a hard time believing you when you say that you were seriously trying to delegate, as not a single soul ever said anything which would remotely confirm this. I believe you had conversations, but they ultimately didn't result in anything in this context.
However, in that mental state, the last thing I wanted to do was resolve conflicts among adults
I am not sure how to interpret this as there were no conflicts that I'm aware of that needed resolving during your absence, everybody was just waiting
I am more of a person who prefers to stay on the sidelines and engage in what brings me the greatest pleasure - coding, just like any other contributor.
There's nothing wrong with being like that, there are other people willing to do things like resolving issues. Like me. I realize I appeared out of nowhere. As a new instance owner it took a while for me to notice, but when the situation became clear to me I was ready to jump in and help, just like all the other people who had offered their help (before me).
You've basically just admitted that you were either incapable of or unwilling to engage in structural problem solving and management of the kbin project. That's fine, but you should have reached out and informed the community as soon as you became aware of this.
forking turned out to be the best thing that could happen
Yes, forking can have positive side effects and perhaps having two versions in development synchronously can merit more than one. This however was not the proper way to achieve this and using it as an excuse to justify your behavior and inaction is unjust.
However, it is not too late. You can still do the right thing by starting delegation now, by clearly assigning multiple people to all essential tasks, and giving multiple people complete control of kbin.social, so that, should a similar situation occur in the future, you and the community will confidently know that the project will not grind to a halt again.
Then seek a constructive dialog with the mbin community and we can make the project, in it's current for, work. Together.
If you feel uncomfortable with or are have trouble doing any of this, as you've clearly indicated you'd rather spend your time on coding, you are always welcome to ask me for advice.
You see, I don't know how I would act now in hindsight. You have to take into consideration that, at the peak, hundreds of people willing to help appeared out of nowhere, people I didn't know at all. By nature, I am rather distrustful and approach new relationships cautiously - I really need a lot of time to get to know another person well. It's true that after some time, a certain structure began to take shape, but not everything is always as it seems at first glance - especially when so many strong personalities converge in one place. Perhaps it was a mistake that instead of addressing many things publicly, I tried to solve them in private conversations.
And you're right, anyone who knows me a bit knows that I have trouble asking for help. Sometimes, I take too much on myself, which is not good in the long run. I'm working on it. But this time was something more. I promised to take care of things, and under normal circumstances, it would probably be easy for me because I have some experience in resolving such situations. But these were not normal circumstances. I realized this too late. I was just overwhelmed by real life. So many problems collapsed on me that I could never have anticipated. These were the worst months of my entire life. I don't want to write too much about it or make excuses, but at some point, even getting out of bed or eating something became difficult. When I tried to get back to the project, the thought of the backlog and how many people I let down made me feel sick. That's why I'm really glad to be where I am now. I can only apologize to you and try to fix some mistakes. I need to do it at my own pace. I want to clean up the mess, find my rhythm, and then engage in broader communication with people. I'm still recovering on my own.
What I did was indeed a bit malicious, but I believe it was the only way to achieve the intended effect. The fact that I really like you all should not mean that I will be uncritical of your work. I don't want you to fully trust everything that comes from me - only in this way can we fully utilize the potential we have in developing the fediverse. Frontend errors are just a trivial matter; they can be quickly found and fixed. However, the situation is completely different when it comes to backend mechanics. Seemingly minor errors when I was developing karab.in made me undo them for weeks. With larger instances, there may not be a second chance. This is not a centralized system, you have to consider others above all. That's why I am so sensitive to it and have so many doubts about making changes.
It's not that I want to make things difficult for you. I really care about mbin developing in the right direction. I am curious about what the future will bring. I would like kbin to remain rather ascetic, subtle, and something that you need to learn and understand a bit, rather than having everything handed to you on a platter. Mbin can be a different face, with more features, bolder, and I know that you have many great ideas for it. A simple example is the labels for marking mods/admins/ops that you are currently working on - kbin has it marked in a subtle way with a faint left border outline - you can do it differently, and that's great. As someone very wise once said, "If it's not diverse, it's not the fediverse."
@melroy I am sure that this is just the beginning of our shared adventure. I hope you won't hold a grudge against me for long ;) Guys, I deeply regret that we met at this stage of my life, but as I say, all I can do is try to fix my mistakes. Thanks for everything!
OP here. I was intending for this thread to be about the mbin fork and its governance, not about kbin. But I guess I kinda got answers to my questions (in so much as they exist) and then some.
I have no particular relationship/loyalty to ernest or to kbin. Like a lot of people, I just got here. I may or may not stick around.
I myself am a person who tends to become intensely excited by new projects. I can come in with lots of ideas and energy feeling like I will be comitted for a long time. But can then loose interest just as quickly. (It's taken a lot of times around the block to learn that.) So I understand why a maintainer of an open source project would have reticence to bring me, or someone like me, into their project in a position of authority without enough time (months -> years) to prove the comitment and to demonstrate competance. In fact I would regard it as poor judgement to just accept a ton of input like that. Just accepting whoever is offering energy can really lead to a lot of problems. I've been on both sides of those problems!
I started this thread to ask questions about mbin because I'd never seen an open source projects described like this. The mbin folks came in not really to provide answers to those questions, but to make insults on how they perceive ernest's personality and moral charecteristics. These based on vague but petty sounding grievances. None of these posts do much to reccomend the project to me. Sounds like waa waa waa babies. If the main grievance is they weren't allowed authority on kbin main, then I agree with that judgment based on the posts here.
Hopefully everyone simmers down. Maybe mbin can define itself in a less reactionary way in the weeks and months to come.
Well then. I don't know what happened here. I was asked about this situation so I linked here, to find, to my surprise, that my final comment is missing.
This is a month ago now and I don't want to continue the thread, but also do not like my comments going missing. So here is my response to the above
I understand your response, if I would stumble across this just new I'd respond the same.
This situation had been going on for months and this was in fact the first time ever that Ernest has properly responded to a message, anywhere, from anyone, since he went silent. So I took this opportunity to ask questions and get answers from him. A lot of people had already given up or lost interest, but I wanted to know for sure.
I was undecided up to now, but have always expressed my serious doubts about whether a person like him is suitable as a leader of a project like this. Not because of his personality, I am sure he's an awesome guy, but because of his lack of professionalism when things go wrong. Don't get me wrong, I felt very sorry for him all along, he was in a terrible position, no doubt about that and as I've said before I fully sympathize with him. But he should not have dragged the project and its community down with him. I'm glad he's climbing back up again and with him his loyal supporters.
What this entire roller-coaster ride, including this thread, has demonstrated to me over the past few months is, sadly, that should something go wrong again, it will very likely happen in the exact same way.
That for me removes all doubt; I conclude that he is not a suitable leader. I am sorry to say it but it's the way it is.
There is no grievance, but if this all sounds like waa waa babies to you I can fully understand. People were not pleased by the bad code being planted so that kind of set the tone and I understand I sounded like I was trying to make him sound bad. Everything I've said to and/or asked about him is based on reality, however.
It makes sense to me it came across as reactionary, but it's done now. A lot was cleared up for me, all doubt has been removed. Let's all move on with whichever version we prefer and make this great project better than ever
Despite the fork. I hope we can learn from each other indeed. That will only benefit both of us.
Although we merge into main it's not a release, we use GitHub/Docker tags to mark releases. And use semantic versioning if needed for minor and patch releases.
Instead you left people who trusted you dangling, only sporadically feeding them promises you would never fulfill.
Now, you see, this is the part that I as an uninvolved observer who's just now catching up on the happenings do not get. Promises that were never fullfilled?
How long has or hasn't this actually been an issue? Because from what I can see looking at the codeberg commits, it seems like development stalled for how long, like a month or so?
I totally get not wanting to be left hanging and having some answers and pathway for how contributions can happen. But as you also agree on, I also get real life being more important and getting in the way sometimes. And in that sense, being out of it for a month or so does not exactly seem like an earth-shattering amount, even if it's annoying when it happens to be the project lead and not much can happen.
I just can't help but feel like all of this has been pretty impatient and premature, which also makes it hard for me to really understand the point of the fork, even if I can relate to the basic rationale behind it. But then again, I have no knowledge of the direct going ons and communications between the contributors and the events that led to this. So there might be a lot I'm just not getting.
“Firefish is a hot new microblogging platform”: it’s not that “new” at all, #Calckey, which has been around since 2021, has only recently changed its name to Firefish
the antennas / news picker had apparently not yet been fully understood by the author: they do not fill retroactively and it is a full-text search that also finds parts of words. Therefore, if it doesn’t fit, search words can be excluded - it works very well for me! If you use it for a little longer instead of just taking a quick look, you can use it to structure your content very well.
“Lack of an official app is kind of disappointing”: “official” apps are perhaps important as a “brand” for some, the so-called “Mastodon” app is also the worst app ever for Mastodon (fortunately with many better alternatives). The PWA for Firefish works great on all devices, if you don’t want to miss out on any features and want the best look, you don’t need an app.
The biggest hindrance at the moment right now is the flagship instance at firefish.social:" The instance has clearly communicated that it primarily serves as a test instance, i.e. it does not strive for or want to guarantee stability. In contrast to mastodon.social, Firefish itself also makes clearer reference to the selection and there are now really many Firefish instances.
For me, the biggest disadvantage of Firefish at the moment is that it doesn’t yet federate properly with Lemmy.
kbin.social's admin (and kbin currently only supports one admin per instance) is also the main dev.
As I understand it, the sudden unexpected popularity of kbin caused infrastructure issues and made fixing bugs and limitations more important, while he still has to reach his feature goals to secure funding so he can actually continue working on kbin full-time. Additionally, real life had a lot of negative surprises in store he had to deal with.
All in all, he hasn't had much time at all to properly moderate the instance, And the past two weeks he's been gone entirely for real life reasons, leaving the instance unmoderated.
It's not an issue with the software itself, just with kbin.social (and of course other badly moderated instances) specifically.
just with kbin.social (and of course other badly moderated instances) specifically.
Yes, there’s clearly a moderation problem, but it’s not just kbin.social.
To rephrase the question: why is it that practically all the insufficiently moderated sites are kbin instances?
kbin currently only supports one admin per instance
An overwhelmed admin could partially explain why a lot of spam comes from a particular instance. But it wouldn’t explain why most of the small instances generating spam have chosen kbin instead of lemmy.
the main problem for non-kbin users, as @ono is using lemmy, is that kbin moderation actions, such as a moderator or admin removing spam will not federate to lemmy, as this is not implemented yet.
for a lemmy user, it appears that kbin doesn’t have any moderation at all, while spam is being removed for kbin(.social) users at least.
for this reason, several lemmy instances have already either defederated from kbin or removed kbin communities from their instance.
fediverse
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.