OpenStars comments on Is this the typical behaviour of fediverse users? Posts in Apple and Nintendo communities immediately get downvoted by people disliking the companies. Can’t they just block the communities?

[–] OpenStars@piefed.social 1 point 1 year ago (4 children)

That requires the effort of either writing or at least running a bot to perform that action, or PieFed can prevent the downvoting before it happens. e.g. Blaze shared this screenshot elsewhere in this OP:

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] Skavau@piefed.social 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

That only impacts communities on Piefed locally. So people unsubscribed from other instances, etc could still downvote and harm a posts visibility across the fediverse.

In any case, I personally haven't identified post downvoting on the whole to be that much of an issue that it is impossible to not notice repeat downvoters by just checking posts a few times a day for a week. Not many people do it.

Obviously if you are running a controversial community it might be different.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] OpenStars@piefed.social 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

So people unsubscribed from other instances, etc could still downvote and harm a posts visibility across the fediverse.

Are you absolutely certain of that - that is not what the feature description seems to indicate? If true, that sounds like a bug request should be submitted, either to fix the feature itself or at least the description to match, although I do not moderate any communities on PieFed so I lack personal experience with this and will have to leave it to you who knows.

I would have naively guessed that it would be trivially easy for PieFed to know which users were subscribed to a community vs. not, but maybe it's in an inaccessible form or something.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] Skavau@piefed.social 2 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

Are you absolutely certain of that - that is not what the feature description seems to indicate?

Piefed can't control lemmy instances like that. I don't know if it crosses over Piefed instances (I'll ask rimu later) but I can't see why it would work on lemmy instances. Similarly lemmy.blahaj blocks all downvotes, but it can't stop people outside of lemmy.blahaj from downvoting posts from lemmy.blahaj. People still see downvotes on lemmy.blahaj communities if they're looking at them from lemmy.world. It just means that from a lemmy.blahaj user's perspective, there are no downvotes on anything.

I would have naively guessed that it would be trivially easy for PieFed to know which users were subscribed to a community vs. not, but maybe it's in an inaccessible form or something.

Yeah, Piefed can read this - but it can only control the downvotes on its own instance.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] OpenStars@piefed.social 1 point 1 year ago

Oh I see what you are saying - PieFed would only count the downvotes from it, or some other PieFed or "trusted" instance, but it cannot stop Lemmy ones from giving downvotes, yes that makes total sense. So long as it controls the sorting feature as well as the displayed total though, that is fine with me.

It is an excellent point that PieFed communities work best when interacted with from a PieFed instance, and with reduced functionality via a Lemmy one. This has become increasingly true as so many new features have gotten added recently - like polls and flairs (user and post) - and will continue to do so as more gets added (like perhaps emoji reactions?:-P).

permalink

fedilink

source

parent