3 ms·
I agree with you mostly, but you're looking at a too individualistic picture in my opinion. Littr.me (or Brutalinks, what I want the software to be known as) en
by mariusor 4y ago
I agree with you mostly, but you're looking at a too individualistic picture in my opinion. Littr.me (or Brutalinks, what I want the software to be known as) encourages small communities which share interests, so ideally there will be no vastly off-topic discussions that you as a user need to tune out. So for an individual, all that is left is to find an instance where you share the interest(s) of the other people on it: cat pictures, tech news, gardening tips, etc. Basically each instance corresponds to a "subreddit", and at first all you will be interacting with is content from that niche.
However, due to federation, nothing will prevent you from participating in the discussions for other instances but you have to opt in specifically into those by either commenting yourself, following the author of the discussion, following the instance itself, etc.
PS. I am the dev behind littr.me
- remram 4y agoYour could still have accounts for communities, replacing the "instances" of your current model. You could still follow littr.me and see everything they curated and avoid everything they moderated. I'm not saying you should do this, or even that it's a perfect model, I guess I'm just surprised it hasn't been tried.
- mariusor 4y agoThe other link aggregator options in the fediverse allow this, so people that want to work with that model they can choose one of them. In littr.me I want the focus to be explicit on forming a smallish community surrounding a restricted range of interests.
- remram 4y agoI am not familiar with the other aggregator then. The only other one I know is Lemmy, and while it does have the ability to create multiple communities on a single server (= subreddits), those communities appear the same to everyone. There is no following users, only communities. It's possible I missed a platform though (exciting!)