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

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=$(curl --request GET --url "https://walledgarden.xyz/api/v3/community/list?type_=All&page=${page}&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!

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 [email protected] 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).

For Season 1. (Season 2 has different credits.)

Some non-Lemmy Groups that are interesting or might get interesting:

PieFed: [email protected]
MBIN: [email protected]
PeerTube: [email protected]
WordPress: !dbzer0.com@dbzer0.com
NodeBB: [email protected]
a.gup.pe: [email protected]

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

Fasting (for Ramadan)

Not sure about “slow poisoning”

Looks like it’s this vid: https://framatube.org/w/9dRFC6Ya11NCVeYKn8ZhiD

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.

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.

I’m not sure, either.

I can imagine, though, that if Lemmy automatically inserted the original post author in replies as a Mention, it would be indistinguishable from when it’s done manually to page another user. So if you made a post as a Lemmy user, every reply in the comment chain would show up in your Notifications.

You and db0 are doing different things - he has blog that Lemmy users can interact with as if it was another Lemmy community, whereas you have a blog that you want to use to post articles into a different Lemmy community.

A reply is sent from Lemmy twice - once to the community to Announce out to its followers, and once to the person being replied to. A top-level reply will appear on the WordPress blog because it is a reply to the author. A reply to a reply won’t, because the blog is not following the Lemmy community (so won’t get the Announce), and the author isn’t the person being replied to.

If you want a reply to a reply to also appear on WordPress, you need to treat it like Mastodon, and also Mention the original author. Here is an example that also appeared on the blog: https://lemmy.world/comment/14897939 (the reply from ‘freamon’)

TootSweet’s link was to a migration. A migration is used to upgrade a database’s schema - changing the limit on username length from whatever it was, to 255. As it happens, it’s still 255 now, but an upgrade from 3 years ago isn’t a good source for that, because as they themselves said, there could very well have been been upgrades since, that further changed the limit.

I used ‘unscientific’ because it would be a pain in the arse for someone else to reproduce, it only applies to one instance, it’s a test on someone else’s in-production system that you have no control over, and the error that returns isn’t necessarily from the backend. It looks more like a Form Validation error (i.e. from the frontend). It’s perfectly possible to create a frontend that puts it’s own limits on username length, and there’s some that no doubt already exist, so a brute-force test of those limits isn’t telling you anything reliable about what Lemmy’s internal limits are.