I personally thought it was very entertaining to watch an admin on ml having to ban me from every community with some sidecar process. He created Lemmy and has some of the same issues, it seems.

Lemmy is woefully lacking in transparency in many ways.

Mods should be able to pre-emptively ban a malcious account from all communities that they moderate, not just the community that was attacked.

I thought they could. I once got banned from several generative-AI art comms for posting in the FuckAI comm. Kinda wish the person had reached out as my position on AI is neither extreme nor set in stone, and I quite liked some of the things posted in their comms. I would have loved to have had a discussion. Anyway, the ban ended up only being for a week or two. I've made sure to upvote some stuff they posted, but I shouldn't really need to do that.

From title, I disagree with you because I browse /all pretty exclusively, but I sub to a bunch of comms I think are interesting. I just haven't gone to /subscribed or whatever yet, because the Fediverse is growing and new stuff is being added all the time and I wouldn't want to miss out, and it's small enough I can keep doing this.

I appreciate the info. So bug confirmed.

Either all subjects of abuse reports should see the report, or none of them. No good reason mods should have that privilege exclusively.

Also no good reason users should be unable to narrow the recipient list. It should be tick boxes so users don’t have to hunt around for who to contact, which deters spam reporting.

An admin of an instance will see reports on any users who belong to that same instance, even reports made on community moderators.

I believe a moderator of a community would be able to see reports made on themselves if the comment that was reported was made within a community they moderate, and I think they could resolve those reports themselves, which would usually move them to the 'resolved' tab for the instance admin, reducing the chances of them seeing it.

If that were to happen, it would be easy enough to directly DM an instance admin with an explanation and links to the concerning material.

yeah, we just figured it out. I was blocking thelemmy.club because they were previously a Cloudflare node. They have been liberated so I stopped blocking them and that fixed the problem.

Now there is a new mysterious problem in the parent thread: I cannot see any of the comments in that slrpnk.net thread. I can only see those comments in my notification view.

FWIW, I can see it on your profile page.

Tbh i dont know the software well enough to comment. Hopefully it gets added soon!

Thelemmy.club is actually listed on the federated instances list. It looks like your admins have chosen to explicitly block those communities in particular. I'm not clear on the details, but I've not been hearing good things about the sdf lemmy (not sdf in general). You might want to consider a different instance with more transparent admin.

It’s kind of a futile exercise because even if you could search communities on a defederated instance

It’s not about the server making extra connections. The search failed to get results given a specific community name and location. The software knows why it failed. It is neglecting to pass that info on to the user. Giving specific error feedback is the sort of task that should be an automatic assumption when writing code. If a request has obvious potential to go unsatisfied, the programmer should expect that anomaly feedback will be expected. It’s the sort thing that should not even arise as a bug report.

Now to be clear, I reported this thinking that SDF was blocking thelemmy.club.. which would be fair enough if true, but it turns out not to be. kbin.cafe is the only expressely blocked instance. From there, it’s something else.. maybe a silent block by the firewall or a block by the other host.

I recall that some software supported that and some did not (lemmy vs kbin vs piefed... mastodon). mildseason wrote that Lemmy would have to gather info it does not have, which led me to think Lemmy was one of the pkgs that neglected the disclosure feature.

In the case of sdf, thelemmy.club is not on the blocked instance list. So there is a different problem with SDF. Which is exactly why it is important for the software to inform the user when a search for a fully qualified community name fails.

It's kind of a futile exercise because even if you could search communities on a defederated instance you wouldn't be able to subscribe to them because the servers are not sharing information. I can see why the devs would prioritize other work and leave it to 3rd party sites to display defederations.

I know the Lemmy devs are preparing to release v1.0.0 which has an improved API. You're right to highlight the issue. Hopefully this feature is implemented soon.

At the end of the day, Lemmy is free software and the devs are only paid through donations. I think it's to be expected that the software is not perfect but im still very grateful that it exists.

other software (e.g. Mastodon) has an API to query for nodes that are defederated and admins have a choice whether to expose the list. Lemmy devs neglected to use that mechanism, but the Lemmy server still maintains an internal list of defederated nodes IIUC.

https://lemmy.sdf.org/instances. It's not hidden, it's linked in every page footer

I would call failing to inform the user a clear defect. It should in the very least supply the information it has. I believe defederating is done within the Lemmy server software, which knows which nodes are defederated. OTOH, it is possible for a Lemmy admin to not use that mechanism and to defederate using a firewall. In that case, the Lemmy software is limited (though it could still say something like “time out trying to reach the other host”).

Admins have reasons for defederating. I am not sure if Lemmy already captures that. There are various levels of effort that could be made in fixing the defect, but I’m calling it a defect because it has info that it is not sharing. I’m sure of that because it’s unlikely that all admins on all the nodes I am on are using just the firewall to defederate. SDF is in fact documented in a 3rd party dataset to be defederating with thelemmy.club.

This is a natural feature of activityPub.

IIRC, other software (e.g. Mastodon) has an API to query for nodes that are defederated and admins have a choice whether to expose the list. Lemmy devs neglected to use that mechanism, but the Lemmy server still maintains an internal list of defederated nodes IIUC.

(update)

Bit of an extreme way to phrase it but i do agree, more transparency around defederations would be a good thing.

However i dont think this is a bug. This is a natural feature of activityPub. There is nothing to fix to enable what you want. Developers would have to write new code to gather the info. Feels like you'd be better off making a feature request than a bug report.

Calm down. Try to make at least one point without using logical fallacy. Not sure why you think I am upset. Where are you getting that from?

It was an assault on this user's dignity to have to read this.

Are you so upset because the guy that left the sandpaper on your toilet seat this morning is still out there?

Cool, glad you got it sorted.

Oooooohhhhh! Bingo.

I think when I fiddled with that I thought it would tag comments I make as English.

Your disappearing comment (rako) is listed as french language. In your settings under "discussion language"do you have it set to english? Try setting it to "undetermined"

Yes, but I cannot see rako’s comment when logged in. Which also means I cannot interact with it.

There are three comments.

Like I said, I block nothing. I go to settings » blocks and there is nothing.

Normally, in other accounts, I block Cloudflare instances. But my libretechni.ca account currently blocks nothing.

Did you block the poster?

Yeah, it does add some confusion. It should be documented, or maybe the use of ^ and $ should be explicitly refused except by special flag, or something.