aka freamon
Codeberg: https://codeberg.org/freamon?tab=activity
Anything from https://lemmon.website/ is me too.
Lemmy has mangled that script a bit.
Where it says ‘%24%7Bpage%7D’, it should a dollar sign, an open curly bracket, the word ‘page’, then a close curly bracket.
It displays a bit better at the source (click the multi-coloured fedi-link thing).
The only way I can think of is to use the API to get all communities, and then filter out the ones without local subs. So a basic BASH script would be:
#!/bin/bash
echo -n '' > /tmp/allcomms.txt
page=1
while true
do
communities=$(curl --request GET --url "https://walledgarden.xyz/api/v3/community/list?type_=All&page=%24%7Bpage%7D&limit=50" --header 'accept: application/json' | jq .communities[])
if [ "${communities}" == "" ]
then
break
fi
jq -r '[.community.id, .counts.subscribers_local] | @sh' <<<$communities >> /tmp/allcomms.txt
page=$(( page + 1 ))
sleep .5
done
while read id count
do
if [ $count -eq 0 ]
then
echo "$id has no local subs"
fi
done < /tmp/allcomms.txt
(It’ll take a few minutes to run)
After that, how you purge the communities with those IDs I’m less sure of. My guess would be:
Get a login tokin:
JWT=$(curl --request POST --url https://walledgarden.xyz/api/v3/user/login --header 'accept: application/json' --header 'content-type: application/json' --data '{"username_or_email": "YOUR_USERNAME","password": "YOUR_PASSWORD"}' | jq -r .jwt)
Use Admin/Purge from the API:
curl --request POST --url https://walledgarden.xyz/api/v3/admin/purge/community --header "authorization: Bearer $JWT" --header 'content-type: application/json' --data "{"community_id": ${id}, "reason": "no local subs"}"
As long as purge lets the community be recreated again (which it should do), then that should be okay.
Don’t take my word for any of this for an in-production Lemmy server, though. Test first!
Whatever the views are about MBFC, Tesseract integrated it better than LW’s bot. If you don’t like MBFC, it’s just an option in your user settings to turn it off for Tesseract, whereas the bot caused a bunch of problems that weren’t even related to concerns about accuracy and bias. Drive-by bots can be annoying, because it leads people to believe there’s legit content where there isn’t, and not every client respected LW’s bot use of spoiler Markdown, so they ended up with a massive comment from it that dominated the screen.
That’s what they’re doing though, isn’t it? They have an account on Friendica, and they’ve used it to make a post within a Lemmy community (the community being !chat@beehaw.org in this case).
I saw a post recently that was from Friendica to Lemmy: https://libranet.de/display/0b6b25a8-2267-afe6-6e6e-34b123429965 was to https://beehaw.org/post/18472167
Maybe you can copy whatever they did (or ask them).
Some non-Lemmy Groups that are interesting or might get interesting:
PieFed: !antisocialmedia@piefed.social
MBIN: !FloatingIsFun@fedia.io
PeerTube: !veronicaexplains@tinkerbetter.tube
WordPress: !dbzer0.com@dbzer0.com
NodeBB: !fediverse@forum.wedistribute.org
a.gup.pe: !photography@a.gup.pe
How well they backfill and inter-op is very platform-dependent, obvs (your platform and the remote platform)
If you’re trying to do this at feddit.org, it’s because the ‘Nimi’ field is too long. It looks to be about 22 characters, but the max length for an actor at feddit.org is 20.
For each instance, the restriction can be viewed from the command line with: curl https://feddit.org/api/v3/site | jq .site_view.local_site.actor_name_max_length
As things are atm, Lemmy users will likely also need to also fetch this video by pasting the URL into search (there’s no backfilling, and channels still don’t seem to automatically update - e.g. see https://lemmy.ml/c/thelinuxexperiment_channel@tilvids.com?dataType=Post&sort=New).
If Lemmy / PeerTube inter-op was better, there’d be less need for Lemmy users to be doing what they’re currently doing with posting them separately. (It’s good that more people will see this video, but it effectively leeches votes and comments away from the original creator).
The first link in the cross-post chain is to https://piefed.social/post/413111, which is for the channel, and shows that it was made 4 weeks ago, and includes a comment from the main LW admin.
Your suspicions about this video seem off, but if you want to keep them, they should be directed at person who posted this old video into Lemmy, not the video’s author. As well as a PeerTube instance, Jeena has a PieFed instance, and it seems reasonable enough for him to use his own channel to discuss things that have affected him and are relevant at the time.
What’s even weirder is that this video was already posted to !videos@lemmy.world by Jeena a month ago, and OP commented on it then. It doesn’t get picked up as a cross-post (by either Lemmy or PieFed) because PeerTube has 2 different formats for its URLs (a recent change to PieFed means they get they will do from now on, but it doesn’t apply to old posts).
You shouldn’t read too much into being banned from 50 communities - it’s just a fudgy workaround for being banned from the instance.
If you want to read up on people’s objections, there’s load of comments at https://lemmy.world/post/18805474 and the GitHub Issue it links to at https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/4967
I’m not personally in favour of ideas about voting privacy (I think it’s a bit anti-Fediverse and hampers backfilling), but those who disagree tend to feel more strongly about it than I do, so I try to avoid arguments about it.
I think they still need a separate user account. For one thing, a PeerTube channel is ‘attributedTo’ the user account, in the same way that Lemmy communities are ‘attributedTo’ the moderators. A Group belongs to at least one Person, it can’t belong to itself. Another is that it allows for creators to comment on videos, and either be recognised as the ‘OP’, or as a fellow content creator.
In terms of rendering things like Likes and Dislikes, it has the info in the backend, so it may as well. They don’t Announce votes like Lemmy does, you have to activitely fetch them, so the channel as it exists on PeerTube provides a definitive source. Likewise, there’s all sorts of reasons why comments get out of sync, so the channel provides an authoritative place where you should be able to see them all.
There is a friction though. I like the idea of a place that only open to people willing to create content, and isn’t interested in signups from ‘lurkers’, but providing a mobile app doesn’t seem compatible with that.
they seem to only give accounts to creators
That doesn’t seem unreasonable to me. I’ll get in trouble for saying it, but I think that PeerTube is for video channels what Lemmy should be for communities. It should be that if you want to start or moderate a community, then you sign up to Lemmy, but if you just want to interact with one, you use a user account provided by software that’s fully geared up around users (e.g. Mastodon).
Ignoring for the moment that Lemmy’s federation model hasn’t been widely adopted, and that comments from Mastodon that appear in Lemmy often have annoying Hashtag / Mention spam, my fantasy version of a post in a Lemmy community would look something like https://tilvids.com/w/wjTD7fp9qy4KmTkBdSoWyc, which was created by a PeerTube user, but has been commented on and voted for by users from Mastodon, Sharkey, PieFed, other PeerTube instances, and MBIN.
Amongst those subscribers, commenters, and voters should be Lemmy users, of course. In this thread, it feels like PeerTube is being criticised by people who want to use it in a way that it’s not designed for, because they can’t interact with it from their Lemmy account. If inter-op was better, there’d be no need to create a new account anywhere, and it would have a network effect - the channels that people are trying to discover would already have been brought in by other users, and findable through a conventional Lemmy search. Also, the votes and comments from Lemmy users that are currently going to whoever takes a PeerTube video and posts it in the likes of !videos@lemmy.world, would instead be going to original creator. This would also aid discovery (since people would be more likely to see the channel in ‘all’), and might have also some incentivising influence on the creator.
Basically, I blame Lemmy.
That view of The Linux Experiment is quite similar to the view from lemmy.ml, with the latest post also being from 9 months ago. I wonder if your PeerTube instance and Lemmy 0.19.x have the same problem, where “something changed” at PeerTube, and new videos stopped appearing at federated sites that didn’t change to accommodate the update. Are you running an old PeerTube version?
alien.top got people’s ire because it created a different bot account for every Reddit user, but this one just looks like it posts everything as ‘LemmyLinkBot’, with the Reddit user as the first line a post / comment.
Nothing. It wasn’t about the edit.
I’ve said elsewhere that I thought your second follow-up question was disingenuous, so I’ll expand on that here. That’s the thing that annoyed me. Not because I think no-one should question me, or because no-one should inquire further, but because the more questions you want to ask about a particular thing, the more informed those questions need to be. Otherwise it just gets tedious, explaining why irrelevant things are irrelevant. User display names aren’t relevant to an API’s ‘/site’ response; ActivityPub isn’t relevant at all, and ‘name’ is such a generic, widely-used word, that reaching for it as evidence that I might be confused is such a stretch, I don’t know why you’d go for it. It made me question your motive, given that the likelihood of you being correct - after fishing a word out from something you don’t seem that experienced with - is so low. It stops reading as a well-intentioned question, and starts reading as scepticism for scepticism’s sake.
I made one arsey comment, and you replied to it 9 times. It was only ever going to get pedantic. It’s too late to complain about it now.
I don’t know. I’m still hung up about this ‘references’ thing, I think. It reads like you intend for your post to be an objective resource for others to use, but then fall back to it being good enough for your subjective purpose when questioned about it.
It feels like wanting to have your cake and eat it - a authoritative-looking post that isn’t authoritative.
it’s silly to ask you for advice because you don’t use Lemmy
That was never my argument. I think you know this.
Being reluctant to answer any more questions about a topic doesn’t mean I was wrong to provide an initial answer. It just means my bandwidth has been exceeded. If Lemmy was a project I was invested in, and I didn’t think your second follow-up question was disingenuous, then it would’ve been different, but as things were, I resented being given homework about it.
More so ‘other Fediverse socials’.
Here’s an example on PieFed, that’s a PixelFed user tagging their photos with ‘dailyphoto’ and then sharing via a.gup.pe on Mastodon: https://piefed.social/tag/dailyphoto