Skip Navigation

Posts
15
Comments
351
Joined
2 yr. ago

♪ Longe vá, temor servil ♪

I may post/reply/boost in:🇧🇷 🇺🇸 🇪🇸 🇯🇵 🇳🇴(or close languages)

I also may boost posts I make with alts, but I'm mainly here so that should be rare.

  • Any lasting changes, for better or worse, take time and effort. And among all the noise, gaslighting and problems people have to deal with, they seek change only when it gets to their comfort zone.

    If you see an alternative as a better option, I'd suggest pushing that to those that may be interested, even if marginally so. But be watchful if the person shows too much resistance to what you show, and slow down then, else you risk making the person even resent what you were showing.

    Also, some concessions may be needed, such as having some presence in the tools you want to ditch but pointing to the alternatives as possible, being more active in your preferred places, sorting links and resources in the bio, posts, comments, etc., by what you find more relevant first, and so on.

  • Learned yesterday they also bridge sites. Hadn't found what technology they were using so had no clue how they did it, so thanks for the lead!

  • I'm not familiar with PieFed to that extent, so sadly can't tell.

  • The feature request:https://codeberg.org/quokkau/Pavlova/issues/3

    About your idea, let me try to explain:When you make a post in PieFed, and presumably to Pavlova, there's a form you need to fill.This form has fields like title, tags, link, etc. which you fill to publish as a post, similar to Reddit.And also similar to Reddit, it has different types of forms for different types of posts.If you want to post, e.g., an article from PC Gamer, you'd usually pick the link form. If you just want to ask or say something, you pick the discussion form. And so on.Your post would be your own words, so linking elsewhere would already be hardly justifiable.And if you make a discussion post, you can't cross-post.If you make a post in one of the two meditation communities and then link it on the post to the other, I can think of 3 problems.First, there wouldn't be any other communities to cross-post to.Second, it could be seen as offensive to the second community and any tangential ones you cross-post to, as you'd be leeching the given communities by indirectly saying "go to this community to interact".Third, it could be seen as spam.

    As community-based fediverse instances often group similar posts together, personally I'd suggest to just manually make the same post as a discussion post on both communities. Or pick the bigger of the two, either by subscribers or monthly active users (MAU).

  • Going by the post I linked, it appears to be a limitation on PieFed and seemingly also on its forks.

    I will open a feature request on Pavlova's issue tracker from Codeberg.

  • Community mention, to reach through web browsers: !meditation@feddit.online

    Also added to Threadirator (the site allows private submissions)

    And since I don't do meditation, I wouldn't know what to say to promote the community, but to those that do, I'd suggest making a post about it on !communitypromo@lemmy.ca too.

  • @AloneDownUnder@quokk.au also, checking the post creation form from PieFed, near the bottom, it has a "tags" field. If your instance inherits this too, I'd suggest adding tags related to your question, as then microblog users (e.g. from Mastodon and Misskey) may find your post too, to increase the reach of the post.

  • Your instance claims to be running a PieFed fork.

    If the functions it inherits from PieFed are unchanged, this should be true:https://piefed.social/post/1134894

    Also checked in an alt account I have in a PieFed instance and indeed, the button only appears when it is a link post:

  • MAU afaik is the easier number to find closer to actual engagement.

    But I think engagement could be measured by (comments + votes + downvotes + boosts if available) / (number of posts).

    However, size of a given instance, specially for smaller ones, may cause odd fluctuations, so standard deviation or a threshold of small/medium/large instances may be needed when ranking.

    Also an instance that had a massive initial engagement metric, or an abysmal one, would have its overall score affected for quite a while, affecting the interpretation of others about its metrics. So to mitigate, maybe taking the numbers by time period may be better, e.g. one ranking for the past week, one for the month, one for the semester, one for the year, and one for all time.

  • About the notes in the post themselves, && in Linux bash terminal means "if the previous command is successful, run the next one". Meanwhile, as a comparison, ; means "after the previous command is over, no matter if it's successful or not, run the next one".

    Also not quite sure what's the internal logic for a single &, but the use I found for it is "run the commands before and after it as simultaneously as the system allows", though I'm not sure if this use is a coincidence or an intended purpose.

  • Some elements hint at being a journal, but overall it reads like you're explaining to the reader the process, not narrating what you were figuring out or the synthesis of what you figured out.

  • I'm just bad at coding

    Then might I suggest not wording the opening post like it is a reliable material? Posting as a learning journal/diary would be better, if that's the purpose you mean by "scratchpad".

  • I use Proton's VPN.

    Issues I've observed: timeouts and extra (sometimes excessive) "are you human" verifications, extra step on troubleshootings if a site doesn't load properly or at all, sites load slower, connection may not even work when it's morning in Russia and China or if the server is in a country being bombarded (e.g. Iran's former allies) or possibly also going through some natural disaster, some sites may hardcode your VPN region to your account if you stay in a given IP too much (e.g. Crunchyroll), and some sites block VPN IPs they know about (e.g. Nijimiss.moe, part of the fediverse, and GameFAQS).

  • No.

    What I mean is that if you were banned from either multiverse.soulism.net or lemmy.world at instance level, it could be treated as ban evasion to make a new account on the same instance or to keep posting in the same instance you were banned from.

    But if you were banned from let's say Ani.Social, I hardly find a reason to be banned from other instances.

    Now, a tip people give in my region that I think that applies now, going by your written tone: if you're fuming with rage, before making a response, keep counting until you feel calmer.

    To "reply with the liver", as a local expression says, is surely a way to cause animosity.

  • On a quick search going by memory, this seems like a better community to post it: !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com

    I remember other communities in that line, but it's not something I check so can't remember their names.

    Also don't know where you've been banned nor if it was legitimate or not, but beware ban evasion. Usually that's treated as a legitimate ban reason.

  • ferocious

  • I'd seen the research, yeah.

    The desperation I mean is because a good chunk of social engineering and control is done by gaslighting while suppressing opposing opinions, but with the internet, opinions and information propagate far more easily.

    As tackling freedom of speech and access to information online is an uphill battle, even in the current, semi-centralized model, another front would be to label dissidents, but even that is losing strength. So the next strategy seems to be to monitor who posts, to persecute individuals to use as example.

    When France, not quite an example of democracy from what I can gather, some years back in some judicial battle wanted to consider Linux a potential tool for crimes, since the guy being sued was using it for privacy, a precedent was forming.

    But though as bad as the overall situation may seem immediately, I still think it's damage control. People are speaking, and faster than what individual countries can control with their old tools, so they're having to double-down in their efforts. But a positive on doubling-down, the more they do, the more obvious their methods are, and because of that, the easier it is to find ways to push back, requiring people to organize, something that these countries also used means to scare people into not doing, see protests in Canada, Brazil and US turned into years-long judicial battles meant to bleed the protestors dry while scaring people watching from a safe distance.

  • Forgot to mention, but even though the agendas that brought the world to its current state are all falling, it's still worth pushing against those freedom-chipping projects. Faltering is letting these problems regain territory.