this question aims to look at alternatives, not why we should remain using lemmy or any lemmy instance.

  • @ancom
    link
    23 years ago

    if you find out that lemmy isn’t suitable for you anymore, you suggest to use lemmy as an alternative? I’m not sure if lemmy is a valid alternative to lemmy…

    • @Thann
      link
      13 years ago

      It’s open source and federated. You can modify and moderate it till your hearts content. ‘lemmy’ isn’t a single thing, it’s an idea, and to quote V for Vendetta:

      We are told to remember the idea, not the man, because a man can fail. He can be caught, he can be killed and forgotten, but 400 years later, an idea can still change the world.

      • @ancom
        link
        13 years ago

        I respect your enthusiasm, but you seem to dismiss the alternatives. Your time is limited. You can use it to improve lemmy, same as you can use to improve something else. Arguing that because it is open source and federate, one should invest their time to improve lemmy, is in result also saying one should not use that time to improve other alternatives that are open source too.

        • @Thann
          link
          03 years ago

          Arguing that because it is open source and federate, one should invest their time to improve lemmy, is in result also saying one should not use that time to improve other alternatives that are open source too.

          I’m not making this argument, I’m just countering the assertion that there is a single “Lemmy” that can become unsuitable. When In fact it is software and a network that are both mutable.

          • @ancom
            link
            23 years ago

            I’m just countering the assertion that there is a single “Lemmy” that can become unsuitable

            Earlier you said, that because it is open source, lemmy will always be suitable for anyome, because they can just modify it, as you say.

            Modifying lemmy means, that during this time you won’t be able to modify something else, and neither does the possibility to modify something grant you the resources to actually do it. That means, in order to have lemmy suitable, you do it at the cost of dismissing alternatives.

            It also misses the point, about the power lead developer hold over every lemmy instance. If you believe those developers are unfit for that position, and if that matters to you, then changing software might for some be the only solution, and that is what the question is addressing.

            • @Thann
              link
              13 years ago

              You’re completely right, and this issue is especially problematic and noticable with cryptocurrencies. Fortunately though you are generally not the only person who feels a certain way, and you can generally find a community of devs to make a fork. My assertion is that once the Lemmy devs start causing problems, people will make a fork of lemmy that addresses your concerns with the codebase, and because Lemmy was the most suitable before, the fork will continue to be the most suitable for a while. At that point “what is Lemmy” becomes a semantic argument.

              • @ancom
                link
                13 years ago

                But why should I want a fork of lemmy when I prefer to have a fork of https://postmill.xyz/?

                I prefer the design of postmil over the design of lemmy. There are things I dislike with lemmy, there are things I dislike about postmil. I don’t want a fork of lemmy, I want a fork of postmil.

                • @Thann
                  link
                  13 years ago

                  I’m not saying what you should do, I’m saying what I would do =/

                  • @ancom
                    link
                    13 years ago

                    ok, that’s fair.