This will take place ~24 hours from now. Feel free to post and upvote questions beforehand in this post, as it will turn into the AMA tomorrow.
This is a chance for any users, admins, or developers to ask anything they’d like to myself, @nutomic@lemmy.ml , @SleeplessOne1917@lemmy.ml , or @phiresky@lemmy.ml about Lemmy, its future, and wider issues about the social media landscape today.
There’s also FEP-d36d which is a standard for group-to-group following. In Lemmy terms, a community could subscribe to another community.
In this case, why not merge?
I think the major advantage with this model is that it gives those local communities a little more flavor while allowing the same functionality as the large communities (probably a good place to apply scaled sort). It also allows for a sort of curated multi-reddit functionality. Most importantly, it seems flexible and generalizable enough to allow for building advanced group features on all platforms, while still advancing the goal of inter-operability. A more straightforward multi-community functionality or the OP solution would have a lot of unanswered questions regarding federation. I’d be curious to see how kbin does it and whether that federates well. All that said, I think a lot of communities probably should be looking at negotiating a merge.
I always like there are basically two types of topics (because after all, communities are focused on a topic)
I know there is the political aspect to take into account, but for me that comes back to the first point: if enough people of the same political side want to talk about something between them, that’s good. If not, they might have to put that aside and go for the second option.
Strong agree
ooooh I like it!
I think FEP-2100 is a much more promising approach because it makes communities more resilient in case an instance goes down.