this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2025
12 points (100.0% liked)

PieFed Meta

587 readers
2 users here now

Discuss PieFed project direction, provide feedback, ask questions, suggest improvements, and engage in conversations related to the platform organization, policies, features, and community dynamics.

Wiki

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

"Field must be between 3 and 5000 characters long."

it WAS between 3 & 5000 chars, but this is blocking it still??

Now I'm chopping it into pieces, to see if that'll work, to get this feedback available for the dev..


There are a number of gotchas which seem to be missed by the author ( excellent thinker/writer, generally ) of that blog-post..

https://join.piefed.social/2024/06/22/piefed-features-for-growing-healthy-communities/

Inexperienced mods points: put training-wheels information right there where they need it

As Atul Gawande noted, there are 2 categories of checklists ( book "The Checklist Manifesto": he's the guy who made the UN's surgery checklist )..

  • checklists for discussions-between-people/roles which have to happen
  • checklists for tasks which have to happen

Knowing this, is there some set-of-checklists which new-mods can have, which takes them no more than 1.5mins to read, & which accurizes their actions, in modding?


the low-karma section, users who downvote too much..

Notice that some have 100.0% of their votes being downvotes, & another has 50.0%??

That, to me, looks like insufficient data-points for statistics to be valid on them!

1 downvote & no upvotes, is 100.0% downvotes, right?

you have to identify how many votes they have cast, in order to be competent to interpret the percentages properly , right?


Oh, this: brigading, or whatever it's called, when a faction rampages somebody with downvotes, to get them punished, for not-groveling-to the faction who decided to rampage on 'em..

That happens.

Not just online, it happens in families, too..

It cannot be accommodated, so therefore the diversity of users who did the downvoting of the user in-question is important..

IF it's some specific subset of users who are systematically abusing people of whatever attribute, THEN it isn't the downvoted who are the problem, it is the down-votERS who are the problem, right?

( as people have noticed, Hitler & Trump both are using law to dismantle civil-society's laws .. this leverage is exactly what I'm talking about, but in a different context: just because a complaint has been filed, doesn't mean that it's the complainer who's good..

Psychiatrist M. Scott Peck, in his book "People of the Lie", identified that when somebody is introduced to him in his professional-capacity, as "the problem", it is routine to note that that person is the identified patient .. but to reserve-judgement until they can figure-out who's telling the truth, see?

This is what I'm holding to be required: see not-just the apparent evidence, see the actual evidence, before judging..

Usually the apparent-evidence is going to be right-enough.

The problem is that when one is being used as a weapon by a gaslighter to harm an already-abused life, the cost of that isn't "minor".


Low-quality communities ( where "karma" is thrown-around like confetti ) have their karma disconnected..

Really, those communities ( the memes communities you identify, e.g. ) do provide a service, so some karma might be in order?

I'm thinking square-root of upvotes, though, or 5th-root of upvotes, or something: find out what fraction actually is fairly proportional for such communities, & let people who cheer the population up have some karma from that..

the number of people in the community would be in the equation I'd use, & so would the number of daily-participants in the community, so that if some community got HUGE, it'd get its karma-equation toned-down more .. but yeah, people who bring smiles onto the lives of the depressed are doing good, as many comments from people throughout such communities, through the years, has shown..


to be continued..

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Oh, 1 other point, discovered in trying to post this as a single-post, & being blocked by the PieFed coding..

On the instance I want to run, I'm going to be doing really long articles, so having a character-limit of 4000 or something won't work.

Please code PieFed so that the instance-admin is offered your default, but is allowed to set a max-character-limit for posts of whatever they want, like 16k, or 32k, or 64k+ chars, if required, for that instance,

instead of having to find the places in the source-code to have to change, & hope they caught all the locations, without understanding the code ( I'm not a programmer .. yet .. someday .. : )

_ /\ _

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

Ok.

Posts are now limited to 50k, comments to 10k. Same as Lemmy.

Enjoy!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I've seen something similar, where someone on lemmy left a very long (certainly more than 5000 characters) comment as a reply to mine, and it never federated to me. It could have just been a one-off glitch but it made me wonder if there's a length limit to federation as well...

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

My Mastodon account has a 12,000 character per item limit.

It seems to be the server-code, not the protocol..

_ /\ _

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

Hmm, that's a bit concerning if too long posts don't federate because of a server-side limit. I mean, ok don't federate a 100TB post and destroy my instance by eating up all the disk space, but if an instance admin wants to support the 12k character limit that Mastodon has, that should be an option that the admin has access to configure.