I feel like it was meant to be a reply but somehow ended up as a post

It depends on what instance you signed up to. Different instances have different sign-up rules.

Yeah, it’s not curation.

EDIT: At the moment, dunno how much concern there is about things being public on the FV. It can be pretty hard for trackers to pull everything together it seems (for search engines anyway), that I suppose it’s not a major concern just yet?

It’s not a widely opposed aspect of the Fediverse currently, but if a wave of Redditors came here - given how many choose to hide their profile, many 100% would complain.

Idk when it came in. They probably announced it on their site somewhere when it came in.

Ironically enough, I’d argue the fact that public profiles are forced to be public on the Fediverse is going to be more offputting to your average user compared to the complexities of federation.

I’ve never seen such a public announcement, and I’d argue that they probably want the reverse of that. They want it because they want user history to be most available, in general.

There’s no announcement as such, but reddit users can now hide their comment history - and many of them do so now.

No. That user chooses to use that instead of “th”.

Added into the URL

Community moderators can’t instance ban. Only instance owners and appointed staff can do that now.

Won’t pretend I understand this but it reads a lot to me like if a mod decides to ban you because he doesn’t like an opinion or something you get banned from the whole of piefed.

No, it doesn’t. It means that if piefed.social bans you (and you’re based on a piefed instance) you wouldn’t be able to post on any piefed.social community. That previously didn’t happen, and you could still post on communities from instances that you were banned on - they just didn’t federate out. This was a blindspot as trolls could continue to harangue communities on instances they were banned from locally and the community moderators, not being from their instance, would not even know.

It would not affect your ability to post anywhere else on any other instance in those specific circumstances.

Yes yes, I know, it was a very bad instance, but I don’t think it’s a good reason to make this decision in all the other instances.

I think that if someone is banned from an instance, it makes sense that they literally cannot post or comment on any community from that instance. The ban may well be unjust, but I think if an instance is run like that to begin with, and you don’t like it as an instance admin - that you have bigger problems.

Well, in that case, even though I’m ethically opposed to that person’s treatment of animals and don’t want them around any of our users, I believe in the principles of the Fediverse strongly enough that I think they should be able to post their hamburgers to the .world local copy of our food community, and share their burgers with the .world people who like to see hamburgers. Even though I think they’re doing a bad thing, I support the rights that enable them to do it.

I don’t, really. I think this is a hole that is being used for abuse and niche cases don’t really justify the utility of this vector for harassment and annoyance being plugged. There are plenty of other cooking communities banned users could post to.

Maybe, if we get into the meat of this it could become some instance-level setting, but I think this is highly niche.

Well it means that if you were currently banned from lemmy.zip, you would be barred by these changes from posting or replying to any community based from there. You would see the message in the screenshot.

So the Piefed change does impact Piefed users banned from Lemmy instances. It’s just that the reverse is not true.

I’m not familiar with that drama, so I’m going to pretend that user came from .world to make what I’m about to say easier to explain. I think that’s a .world problem. .world users will see it, report it, the report will go to .world admins. Then, the .world admins get a chance to home ban this user, which sounds like it was sorely needed, and if it turns out the .world admins are okay with gore, then they can act according to their own values.

That’s a flagrant example, to be sure, but users can get instance banned for behaviour patterns for less noticeable than that but still be able to comment on communities they are instance banned from. Note that as Lemmy works now, there are already some hard bans associated with being instance banned. When you are banned from a Lemmy instance, you are also automatically banned from communities on that instance that you have interacted in prior. It just doesn’t extend to communities on that instance that you have not posted in.

Also, there are instances that are less moderated than .world that a specific instance banned user operating like that would be a longer problem.

Of course I personally don’t usually agree with gore posting in the way it sounds like it was being done there, and I’ve removed a couple of gore posts from our instance that came from other instances. But some people actually like seeing gore, it doesn’t bother them. The two biggest examples of gore that people might not find offensive are guro porn, and meat. I wouldn’t remove guro porn if it were properly marked as NSFW and had the right content warning. And I know a lot of other instances are okay with posting meat. Hexbear allows meat if it has an appropriate content warning, for example. Oh, and how could I forget, video games. If there’s a c/doom it should definitely allow video game gore!

No, in this case it was directly against the specific communities rules - but because the user doing it was already instance banned, their gore-posting was not visible from the communities home instance perspective. They weren’t posting it in a gore-relevant community.

I’m not sure I agree with this one, actually. If one of our users is banned from a remote instance for reasons I disagree with, I might still want them to be able to talk to our users in the comments on that remote community.

The trouble is that if they’re a problem user, and being realistic, many would be - the community moderators wouldn’t be able to see what’s going on as the comments they post would not federate out. They would effectively be unmoderated.

We had a situation where a user recently banned from lemmy.blahaj.zone was still posting gore to lemmy.blahaj communities on their instance. Obviously it wouldn’t federate out, but people on that same users instance would still see it.

That’s what prompted me to try and deal with this issue, at least from Piefed’s perspective.

The last part is not included with the new changes. Basically this change only effects piefed-based users. I was suggesting at the end that a way be incorporated from Piefed’s end to automatically throw out comments or posts from Lemmy users posting in instances they’re banned on so that they don’t even appear locally on their instance - but that isn’t currently possible.

We have to wait for Lemmy to implement this change from their end for it to be universal.

I think people consider sexual assault differently here, although I’d note that Harry Potter is probably way more of a global phenomenon than Gaiman’s stuff which plays into this too.

I mean this thread does have -27 downvotes

They were following the books. And they did try to incorporate the alien stuff in S06.

I mean sure if you mean piracy, but for those that don’t do that - that is a major appeal of Netflix

Netflix is the main hub for international content these days

You want Lemmy servers to shut down?