this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2025
90 points (90.9% liked)

Fedigrow

1283 readers
52 users here now

To discuss how to grow and manage communities / magazines on Lemmy, Mbin, Piefed and Sublinks

Resources:

Megathreads:

Rules:

  1. Be respectful
  2. No bigotry

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] small44@lemmy.world 22 points 1 month ago (22 children)

Custom feeds grouping similar communities

[–] threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago (3 children)

That was addressed in the article under Proposal 2:

it's a feature not many people made use of, and it sounds like a pain to have to constantly create and manage new multi-communities to group together duplicate communities. This shouldn't be a task that users have to manually do.

[–] GorGor@startrek.website 6 points 1 month ago

Personally I think proposal 2 and 3 should happen concurrently. Using the example in the post I would setup a custom feed (that can hopefully consolidate cross posts) for breakfast. I would put pancakes@a.com which subscribes to pancakemasters@b.com I can also add pancakeart@a.com and waffles@a.com. so when someone posts about the best homemade peanut butter syrup recipe that is cross posted to my pancake and waffle communities, I don't get 4 posts about it, I can see it once and choose where to reply (pancakes obviously, I'm a waffle purist).

Community interlinking/subscription fixes a slightly different problem than custom feeds IMO. It's a really good idea, but I would personally still want custom feeds (with the ability to handle crossposts in a customizable way).

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (21 replies)
[–] xye@lemm.ee 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I still have no idea how Lemmy really works, and I had to sign up for this instance - I don’t know, I don’t see a platform growing on that. But maybe that’s the point. I’m trying to engage though! The Voyager app’s “import sub” feature from Reddit is brilliant.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 month ago

Welcome here! Feel free if you have any questions

[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Never thought about communities following communities. It actually makes a lot of sense and would solve the fragmentation issue in an elegant and "democratic" way.

[–] small44@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If admins really bother doing it. A lot of communities are already dead with no active admins to follow others

[–] Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (6 children)

This use case seems to be more for situations when you do have 2 more relatively active communities (with one being smaller).

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 9 points 1 month ago (4 children)

IDK, man. It's not that hard to just check a few of the communities and see which ones are active, and then post to those ones. And the benefit you get, for asking people to take literally a couple of minutes of effort to sort out how to get involved with some particular topic, is pretty significant.

I'm not trying to say not to make good solutions to it, but also, trying to make everything maximally easy carries a significant down side, in that it attracts people who want to put minimal effort into everything (including their posts and their interactions with others once they've arrived on the network.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEJpZjg8GuA

[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 month ago (3 children)

There are only so many of us posting here.

The day we get 10 different people posting about quite popular topics like movies, then sure. But having the current split while there are 5 people posting for the entire platform seems counterproductive.

Another example I have is !privacy@lemmy.dbzer0.com and !privacy@programming.dev. Both communities have similar rules, instances are similar, everything is similar.

There is one poster there that seems to prefer the programming.dev one, so I have to crosspost everything they post to the dbzer0 one so that people subbed to that one don't miiss anything.

!movies@lemmy.world is a bit similar. It's mostly a one-person show (rough estimation, 80% of the posts are one person), but they wouldn't move to !movies@lemm.ee, while we have discussion posts, active mods, everything.

So sure, it's not that hard, but it doesn't mean that people will do it.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 month ago (7 children)

It sounds like community pruning is the better solution here. Users don't need to find dead remote communities in their search results. If there are multiple active communities, that's not an issue, and there's no real reason to homogenize them behind lizard brain FOMO. If there's one active community and 6 dead ones, there's no reason for users to find any of the dead ones.

Forcibly merging communities that exist on completely different websites just because they run the same, or even just similar, software continues to scream "I want centralization".

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 8 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Duplicates are a minor issue. That said, solution #2 (multi-comms) is considerably better than #3 (comms following comms).

The problems with #3 are:

  • Topics are almost never as discrete as the author pretends them to be. Often they overlap, but only partially.
  • Different comms have different rules, and in this situation rule enforcement becomes a mess.

There's no good solution for that. On the other hand, the problems the author associates with #2 are easy to solve, if users are allowed to share their multi-comms with each other as links:

  • a new user might not know which comms to follow, but they can simply copy a multi-comm from someone who does
  • good multi-comms are organically shared by users back and forth

Additionally, multi-comms address the root issue. The root issue is not that you got duplicate communities; it's that communities in general, even without duplicates, are hard to discover. Also note that the root issue is not exclusive to federated platforms, it pops up in Reddit too; it's a consequence of users being able to create comms by themselves.

About #1 (merging communities): to a certain extent users already do this. Nothing stops you from locking [!pancakes@a.com](/c/pancakes@a.com) with a pinned thread like "go to [!pancakes@b.com](/c/pancakes@b.com)".


This is a minor part of the text, but I feel in the mood to address it:

I post once to gauge interest then never post again because I got choice paralysis

The same users who get "choice paralysis" from deciding where to post are, typically, the ones who: can't be arsed to check rules before posting, can't be arsed to understand what someone else said before screeching, comment idiotic single-liners that add nothing but noise, whine "wah, TL;DR!" at anything with 100+ chars... because all those things backtrack to the same mindset: "thinking is too hard lol. I'm entitled to speak my empty mind, without thinking if I'm contributing or not lmao."

Is this really the sort of new user that we old users want to welcome here? Growth is important, but unrestricted growth regardless of cost is cancer.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The same users who get “choice paralysis” from deciding where to post are, typically, the ones who

I'm not so sure. I sometimes have choice paralysis again on a topic I'm not familiar with, and I'm sure quite a lot of other people do as well

[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm sure plenty exceptions exist - that's why I said "typically", it's that sort of generalisation that applies less to real individuals and more to an abstract "typical user".

[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

@threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.works , which is quite active as well, has a similar experience: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/39248886/17090166

To me, choice paralysis happens to most of people, whatever their familiarity level with the platform. I would actually be worried if someone knew exactly where to post for any topic, because it would mean they probably just default to their home instance

[–] ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I've personally developed my system as:

  1. If there are multiple communities, which is the most popular?
  2. If the most popular community is on a problematic instance, skip to the next most popular that is also on a good instance.

That takes away the paralysis, at least for me.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

What do you do when there are two similarly active communities?

[–] ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Hm, I can't recall encountering that yet, but I can see how that would be a harder one to decide. I suppose I might cycle between them.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] ocean@lemmy.selfhostcat.com 7 points 1 month ago (6 children)

Fully agree with solution three, federated communities is the way. Solution two is just dumb and is basically just the subbed feed

[–] crimeschneck@feddit.nl 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I still think multi-communities would be a good feature, even if not for this particular problem. (For example, to a have a dedicated "music" feed that includes several communities for different music styles you are interested in.)

[–] ocean@lemmy.selfhostcat.com 4 points 1 month ago

But if you sub to all of them then there is zero need for such a feed. It adds extra work of making the feed and having to select the feed. There is barely enough content for viewing subscribed my new, why split a post or two a day into a separate feed?

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] asudox@lemmy.asudox.dev 6 points 1 month ago

Multicommunities are/grouping communities is being discussed in this issue atm:

https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/818

[–] JohnnyEnzyme@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago

This was already touched on earlier, but I wanted to add on a bit:

The idea comes from how Reddit handles it (MultiReddits) but from my experience it's a feature not many people made use of, and it sounds like a pain to have to constantly create and manage new multi-communities to group together duplicate communities. This shouldn't be a task that users have to manually do.

This is a pretty bad or maybe just naive take that IMO doesn't sum things in a productive way upon Multi-Reddits. That is-- 1) it arguably doesn't matter a bit how many people make use of it, as each person's MR is going to be a custom affair, and it works at the individual user level anyway, 2) on the contrary, it's no trouble at all to build your MR's either quickly or painstakingly, and you can spread that effort across weeks, months and even years. In the end, I find MR's fantastically useful as super-custom feeds that you can use to stay focused on a tight range of topics.

Unfortunately, these kinds of half-baked conclusions tend to suggest to me that OP doesn't have a whole lot of familiarity with either platform at this time. That said, there's a lot of interesting ideas in the article, it's just a little disappointing in various places.

[–] gon@lemm.ee 3 points 1 month ago

I was actually thinking of something similar a few days ago. The conclusion I came to is "comms as users."

Communities being able to follow other communities is part of that. I think it'd be great.

[–] Libb@jlai.lu 3 points 1 month ago (11 children)

I quite agree with the issue described and I 100% agree it's a critical one but, because none of the proposed solution seem to be ideal, I'm also wondering if this doesn't end up saying the right model, right in the sense that it will work with/feel much more simpler to most users, is a centralized system and not a federated one?

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] Blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] popcar2@programming.dev 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

Oh hey, it's been a while since I've written this. Thanks for sharing it again. When I posted it last year to the fediverse community, people were not ready for it.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›