A good example is https://lemmy.world/c/documentaries

One of their mods, https://lemmy.world/u/sabbah, currently mods 54 communites despite only being on Lemmy for about a month and has never posted on c/documentaries (except for his post asking for people to join his mod team).

The other mod, https://lemmy.world/u/AradFort, has one post to c/documentaries and moderates 18 communities.

Does Lemmy.World have a plan to remove this kind of cancer before we start getting reddit supermods here too?

Edit: This comment shows how this is even more dangerous than I had thought.

Edit2: Official answer from LW admin is here

Final: Was going to create an issue for this on the Lemmy github, but I browsed for awhile and found that it had already been done. If anyone wants to continue the discussion there, here it is - https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/3452

Perhap we need another issue for the problem in the original edit (It being impossible currently to remove a ‘founding’ mod without destroying either the community of their account)

  • Kodemystic@lemmy.kodemystic.dev
    9·
    1 year ago

    Luckily there’s a bunch of instances not just lemmy.world. If we find it’s starting to get too centralized we can always subscribe to other communities. Or am I wrong?

    • ewe@lemmy.world
      5·
      1 year ago

      That’s actually not a bad idea. If they’re not actively modding they might not see posts to the community that say “use that community instead of this one”

    • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
      31·
      1 year ago

      You’re not wrong, but you’re underestimating the importance of network effects. Most users want to be where the other users are, so they’re going to stick with the largest community for a topic unless there’s a really good reason for them to move.

      On top of that, at least on Reddit, moderators had a lot of power to suppress dissent by e.g. shadowbanning people so that their comments didn’t even show up as “[removed],” so not only could they prevent anybody from advertising alternative subs, they could do it in such a way that the other users wouldn’t even notice that something had been censored. Hopefully, Lemmy doesn’t work the same way.

      • DragonAce@lemmy.world
        51·
        1 year ago

        No, its the entire point of a federated system. If one instance goes down, you can create an account on another instance and continue browsing posts from all other servers still online. No one server has complete control of the system.

        • thingsiplay@kbin.social
          21·
          1 year ago

          @DragonAce Okay, but that was not my point. One can improve usability of a decentralized systems. It does not need to be a bad user experience and waste of time.

          • DragonAce@lemmy.world
            21·
            1 year ago

            How is it a bad user experience? Because you have to make an account on another instance? You can still browse from another instance without logging into it.

            How would you suggest they improve the user experience without expecting them to have some sort of centralized login server? Having any sort of centralized user management leads to a single point of attack for anyone looking to exploit the system.

      • Kodemystic@lemmy.kodemystic.dev
        53·
        1 year ago

        I think that if you are concerned with user experience you should stick with a centralized system. I am willing to sacrifice a bit of the user experience for decentralization. But that’s just me.