Discussion about ClubsAll (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 2 weeks ago by kersploosh@sh.itjust.works to c/main@sh.itjust.works

31 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hello, sh.itjust.works community. I am curious what you think about ClubsAll, and whether you think we should stay federated with them. A few other Lemmy instances have recently defederated so this seems like a timely topic for discussion.

In short, ClubsAll is an ActivityPub-compatible Reddit clone. The site currently has one-way federation with no attribution: ClubsAll pulls content from Lemmy and displays it as local ClubsAll content. For example, you can visit https://clubsall.com/c/196 and there is no indication that the content is from https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/c/196.

Here are relevant posts with more information and context:

General discussion: Let's talk about ClubsAll (the ClubsAll founder left comments in this post)
Recent update to that general discussion: As a reminder, ClubsAll is still showing all of Lemmy's content without federating back

In the first post the ClubsAll founder commented that they plan to eventually have two-way federation, and to make the project open source. Whether those things actually happens is anyone's guess.

What do you think?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 weeks ago

How about giving some leeway if they have indicated the intent to fully federate? Say, if they don't support bidirectional federation with 6 months (?), they will be defederated provisionally until they do. That way, we're still taking their declared intent in good faith, but not being a pushover.

[-] Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 weeks ago

I like this solution.

[-] clay_pidgin@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 weeks ago

Seems reasonable. I don't have any technical complaint with what they're doing, but it feels icky as long as there's no attribution.

[-] vinay_clubsall@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Our challenge has been that many people feel differently to what is fair. So I have been requesting if all admins can agree to a common set of rules so we can comply with it and be upstanding community members. Is that reasonable request?

[-] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 weeks ago

That seems fair.

[-] kersploosh@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

I like this. I will put a reminder on my calendar to check on ClubsAll in a few months. If more users complain about it then we can reconsider the approach.

[-] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

I'm not sure if they're aware of this thread, but I think the important part would be to notify them of the intended consequence. The point of the deadline is so that the other party is incentivised to implement compliance in a reasonably timely fashion.

Otherwise, the arbitrary date of now isn't much different than that of a few months later.

[-] vinay_clubsall@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Thank you. I request the defederation being traffic based rather than time based. Would that be fair?

[-] Enkers@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

I mean, ultimately I'm just a user making a suggestion, of what sort of approach seems fair. I'm not certain what a reasonable time (or traffic) limit would be, exactly. I think if you were to make a suggestion to the admins, they'd likely accept it so long as it's reasonable.

this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2024

24 points (96.2% liked)

sh.itjust.works Main Community

7749 readers

3 users here now

Home of the sh.itjust.works instance.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

TheDude@sh.itjust.works

manifex@sh.itjust.works

biela@sh.itjust.works

imaqtpie@sh.itjust.works