174
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/div0@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Ever since I created this instance, I wanted this corner of the fediverse to explore new radical ways to run online social media which attempts to tear down the built-in hierarchies of website hosting. The first step of this was the introduction of admin recalls a while ago, and when some of my co-admins approached me about also adding a piefed.dbzer0.com domain I saw an opportunity to attempt something I've been mulling on for a while: An Anarchist Confederation!

You see, the issue with running a social media, is that there's always a hierarchy with one person or organization having "the keys to the kingdom", whether this is the person with sudo access, or the one who bought the domain etc. This is an inescapable reality of website hosting we cannot get around (Yes, I'm aware of things like nostr etc, but those have ending issues that are beyond the scope of this post). So at the end, you always end up with some form of BDFL, or at best, a non-profit somewhere with an oligarchy of people controlling it.

The Fediverse system is a good-ish solution to that. We get to have social media without any one entity controlling the whole network, but we still have a ton of (beefing) kings and kingdoms instead. Places go down, places come up, people are not sure where to set up accounts and so on. And each of those fediverse instances still have that inherent hierarchy, so the members of say, lemmy.world, are still beholden to the actions of its admins, and their only option is to uproot their whole presence there and go elsewhere, without any safety that the next admin won't cause them issues as well.

So I had the idea, what if we create one single entity, which is nevertheless still not controlled by any one person? When you join that entity, you still get to know what it stands for, and can choose any of the services it operates, but most of those services will be run by different people, so it's not possible for one of them to go rogue or have a burnout and ruin the whole thing.

Ultimately, this approach is meant to protects you, from people like me, pre-emptively.

So when the idea was floated of running an anarchist piefed along with /0, I suggested this concept to the other admins, who happily agreed to give it a try. This had the added benefit of not adding yet more website hosting overhead to myself and to also give a more stable stake to the admins who did the hosting job. Now not only do the admins of anarchist.nexus have the piefed instance they wanted, but they have the extra safety of me not being able to ruin the whole thing by having a burnout/meltdown/stroke or being arrested/disappeared etc.

But the point is not merely to have yet another fediverse instance. The idea here is that we're much more tightly woven together, which further increases the social costs of someone going rogue, as well as strengthens the bonds of all the people involved, making us stronger as a team. What does this mean in practice? All the Flotilla members agree to the following:

Same Rules

This means that all instances in the flotilla follow the same rules, including those voted by our combined community. This means that whether you're part of lemmy.dbzer0.com or anarchist.nexus, we're still following the same code of conduct, we have the same rules like admin recalls, disengage and so on. You can choose your flavor or software, without having to worry about re-learning new rules or admin idiosyncrasies.

Same staff

The Flotilla is built around the idea of sharing workloads. So the members of the instances agree to have admins and sysadmins which can float between them. This is not only meant to strengthen the common control, but also the trust and finally to only require one announcement for new admins, instead of having to have different admin onboarding/recalls per service.

This doesn't necessarily mean that each admin/sysadmin will be active in all instances. For example I don't have the time to be actively involved in anarchist.nexus atm, but I could easily do so if I found it. This creates a much easier way to spread our abilities according to our needs. People who have more capacity, can smoothly go to help in more instances, while those overwhelmed can dedicate themselves to fewer. We hope this both reduces the chance of burnout and gives flotilla members greater flexibility, by being able to use their preferred fediverse software, while staying within a community they helped build-up.

Common Governance

As a natural extension of those two concepts above. The instances will have a shared governance system. This means we will have a common governance community and voting structure. All validated members of the flotilla will be able to vote in governance threads with the same restrictions as we have now.

Likewise, all instances will have a normalized defederation list, which will be handled by following each other's censures on the fediseer, and all bans will be also common from the instances as well. So the flotilla decides person A is not welcome, they're not welcome in all our fleet!

The anarchist.nexus is hopefully just the first instance in our fleet (all kudos go to @fxomt@anarchist.nexus and @tenchiken@lemmy.dbzer0.com) and a proof-of-concept for the whole attempt. If this goes well, we may be able to extend to other software in the future.

As with everything novel, there's bound to be teething issues we're going to encounter, but we're commited to figuring it out with all of you.

And of course, go and join https://anarchist.nexus/ if that's more your speed!

all 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] UniversalMonk@anarchist.nexus 9 points 1 day ago

I already joined and it’s awesome! Thanks for your work on this. And thanks to everyone else who worked on it!

Sorry if you covered this and I missed it. How does this resolve the issue of somebody with sudo access going rogue?

[-] irelephant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 day ago

Different people would have sudo access to different services.

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 day ago

It resolves it in the sense that one person cannot take down the whole flotilla.

[-] Sunshine@anarchist.nexus 15 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

It might be a smart idea to have the ships under different domain registrars and hosting services for the most redundancy possible in case one company wants to censor us.

It’s good that db0 is in France (second-round system/unitary) while AN is in Germany (mixed-member proportional/federal) (both are bicameral) as those jurisdictions, languages, laws, cultures and electoral systems affect how the local authorities act.

[-] Ftumch@lemmy.dbzer0.com 44 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

In case anyone else is wondering, but doesn't feel like searching the web:

Piefed is similar to Lemmy. It federates with the Lemmyverse, Threadiverse and Fediverse. But with some additional features and differences:

  • User flair. (Does not federates to Lemmy)
  • Hierarchical subjects/magazines. For example, there might be a subject like art with sub-subjects like art/paintings and art/statues. (Should be possible to follow these from Lemmy)
  • Instance blocking doesn't just block communities but also comments from said instance.
  • ~~Only supported by Interstellar right now, as far as apps go, but Voyager is also planning to add support.~~ Supported by apps like Interstellar, Summit, Voyager and Boost. Photon also plans support.
  • Written in Python instead of Rust, but somehow performs better (for at least one admin).

I've never actually used Piefed and most information I could find was three months old. If I missed anything important or made mistakes, please let me know in a reply.

Edit:

  • Combines duplicate posts.
  • User karma. Users with low karma get a flair.
  • Comments with a score of -10 or lower get collapsed by default.
[-] taco@anarchist.nexus 34 points 3 days ago

It also lumps comments from different instances together, so if you see a post from one community, comments from cross posts all appear under it. It's nice if you've subbed to overlapping communities.

I'd jumped from dbzer0 to piefed.social because I like the software better, so this post was a nice way to kick off the day.

[-] fxomt@anarchist.nexus 13 points 3 days ago

Glad to have you back!

[-] fxomt@anarchist.nexus 17 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Summit and Voyager now support it, writing from Summit here. Boost too.

Photon is going to support it, too!

[-] standarduser@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

I’m on iOS currently, planning for graphene, is there an iOS variant for each?

[-] Blaze@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago

The flotilla is brave souls risking their lives to bring food to Gaza. You are running a website. Please don't leech off their reputation.

[-] _cryptagion@anarchist.nexus 2 points 16 hours ago

did you think the word flotilla was invented just the other day? a flotilla is a group of ships, and we're pirates. it's part of the theme, you knob.

[-] young_broccoli@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 days ago

I dont understand how this prevents an instance being "ruined" by one person or what the anarchist nexus actually is.

Is it just redundancy? Creating alternative instances and services in the hands of different people so if one dies for whatever reason we have somewhere to migrate. Or is it something more complex. Either way I think its cool to have alternatives and a strong community that wont die based on one persons actions/circumstance and nice that you guys are taking care of us (thanks! ^.^) but, if its "something more complex", I would appreciate an explanation for dumdums pls.

I dont think this is what you are talking about but Im curious; Would something like a p2p social network be possible? like everyone who uses it also hosts a little of it so no one single person, jurisdiction or server is trully in controll of it. Just asking for your expert opinion, not making a request.

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 2 days ago

Effectively yes, it's both redundancy in having things spread out in different hosting and different domains controlled by different people. But it's also an attempt at redundancy that is not only technical, but also social.

I dont think this is what you are talking about but Im curious; Would something like a p2p social network be possible?

There's already things like this, like nostr, and scuttlebutt, but they have their own host of issues which is why the people hosting fediverse servers didn't use them in the first place.

[-] Ging@lemmy.dbzer0.com 26 points 3 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Very cool idea. I love how this collective functions. We don't merely strive to do better out of selfish gain--only dbzer0 recognizes that this is not nearly enough--we must improve the very boundaries and underlying structures themselves if authentic progress for ourselves and others is the aim.

I'm a quiet lurker, but I continue to feel dbzer0's governance and general spirit is how communities were always supposed to be(if that makes sense) Here's to the flotilla!🍻

[-] UniversalBasicJustice@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

How will new sys/admins be selected, vetted, and promoted? What safeguards are in place/could be implemented to keep the flotilla safe from potential malicious actors?

Similarly (if not indentically) what damaging actions could a rogue actor or disgruntled admin unilaterally perform? The voting structure is a good start of course, but are individual actions physically limited until such a vote has taken place or is it a gentleman's agreement-type situation?

Apologies if these questions are answered elsewhere, though I do think it valuable to have them reiterated here.

[-] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 3 days ago

Actually thinking about it, we could even run a piefed poll for new candidates nowadays.

[-] unruffled@anarchist.nexus 9 points 3 days ago

We usually post to ask our users to nominate themselves and then the existing admins review the applications to make a selection. But we could bring in a confirmation vote after the selection of a new admin, just to make sure the instance is ok with it? Or do you have any other ideas?

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 2 days ago

I would prefer to avoid having too many votes for this sort of thing as it leads to people starting to ignore them. Given that we have a recall option, I think it's ok to continue with our existing approach.

I appreciate staying conscious of voting fatigue and tend to agree with that assessment. I do take some issue with relying on the recall option as the primary means to handle potential bad-actor admins. I may be extrapolating further than strictly necessary but I am curious as to what actions a rogue admin is capable of taking unilaterally as well as the potential knock-on effects of a gross abuse of that power.

I suppose my position and concern is aimed primarily at a robust vetting process. I don't think its a stretch to say a majority of db0 users have some level of privacy consciousness. I certainly don't want a security clearance level deep dive into a potential admins personal life but there does need to be some level of certainty of a person's motivations before they are handed the keys.

I don't think a positive post history is sufficient for that decision, especially if (hypothetically) qualitative judgements are made on the actual content contained therein. Such a history is certainly beneficial, but also subject to misrepresentation. Determining who to trust with decision-making powers under the reality of internet anonymity is a tough question, though one I think worth discussion.

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 days ago

but I am curious as to what actions a rogue admin is capable of taking unilaterally as well as the potential knock-on effects of a gross abuse of that power.

  • Deleting comments and posts. But that can be reverted.
  • Banning people. Can be reverted.
  • Purging comments and posts. Much harder to reverse.
  • Removing other admins. Iirc that only can affect people added after them in the admin list.

I suppose my position and concern is aimed primarily at a robust vetting process.

There's some limits in how much we can learn from a person before we trust them. But I think we have a good process with a public nomination post where everyone can comment and declare trust, and then a private discussion and vetting between admins, as we're the ones who have to work closer with the new person. I think we have a process that works well within our limitations, and can always be improved with new lessons learned.

[-] Emma_Gold_Man@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 days ago

If the recall weren't such a high bar I'd agree. At 75% though, not being recalled doesn't represent a mandate from the users. It only means the person hasn't openly and overwhelmingly offended everybody they've interacted with. If that's going to be the bar, it would be good for the community to have some say up front.

[-] LucidNightmare@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 days ago

Thank you for the update.

I’m interested to try piefed so joining now!

[-] Infernal_pizza@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 days ago

Sorry if this is covered in the post, I'm not in a position to read the whole thing right now. Do we have a Mastodon instance? And if not which one do most users recommend?

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 days ago

No there's no mastodon in the Flotilla. Just dbzer0 and anarchist.nexus (for now)

[-] Ging@anarchist.nexus 5 points 2 days ago

I'm going to give you a terrible answer to your last question. I recommend whatever is most convenient for your level of opinion/interests. If you hate the experience or feel something(s) critical is still missing, let that serve as a guide to your next instance to try. No longer being stuck to a walled-garden invites exploration for a good reason or two imho

[-] fxomt@anarchist.nexus 3 points 2 days ago

We don't, but i personally recommend https://kolektiva.social/ or https://todon.nl/

[-] Chill_Dan@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago

Why only expand to other software and not other instances?

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

yes that's also possible! I just foresee that it's not likely a second or third lemmy instance might join us. Those who started their instances already, did it because they probably wanted to run things their own way, and if someone wants to run things our way, well, they would have just joined this existing instance of their preferred software, yanno?

[-] curbstickle@anarchist.nexus 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

🎉🎉

Edit: I do like topics

[-] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I'm always down to try something new. What I'm curious about is the idea of how the hosting of new instances in the flotilla would occur, and how they would join if they created their own. Would they spin up a Piefed/Lemmy instance, agree to commit to uphold the same rules/governance, and await denial/approval from who, the current admins, or a poll of the users?

Also how would load balancing work. Like if one instance has less hardware specs, they may not be able to host an equal amount of users amongst the floatilla. Also how do we load balance the subs. As in if all of the threads/communities are hosted from one instance, doesn't it still make it so that one instance becomes the breaking point?

You may have explained some of this and I didn't grasp it on the first read through.

[-] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 days ago

We don't really expect many to ask to join, but if it happens, I assume we could allow instances to join in a bit of a proving period, until we get to see their admins and can validate their share our values, and then we could initiate a full join. Something like that.

Also how would load balancing work. Like if one instance has less hardware specs, they may not be able to host an equal amount of users amongst the floatilla.

We wouldn't copy our user base there, They would just be part of the collective, sharing rules and staff power. All they would need to host is any of our users who want access to a different software.

this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2025
174 points (100.0% liked)

/0

2072 readers
22 users here now

Meta community. Discuss about this lemmy instance or lemmy in general.

Service Uptime view

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS