youronlyone, to fediverse
@youronlyone@c.im avatar

If you haven't heard, sadly, , one of the popular “groups” platform, is shutting down “probably” on February 29th.

In an email they sent to admins, the owner and developer can no longer support https://chirp.social financially as they failed to find a new job after they were laid off by last year.

So, if you have a Chirp.Social groups, either move to (https://a.gup.pe) (as suggested by Chirp.Social), or if I may, to (https://fedia.io), an [flagship] instance.

This reminds us the importance of having a built-in groups feature, and one where the groups feature actually federates.

Back in 2008, when the was born, we did have a built-in federated groups in / (today known as ). We used bang (!) instead of at (@). A built-in groups feature is more stable as established instances can host them.

Today, we have and (as well as -based instances) to fill in that, as groups is a built-in feature in those software products. It's just a matter of finding an instance that's open to hosting groups for any topic for the ActivityPub protocol.

That said, any Friendica, Hubzilla, Streams-based instances you suggest for groups?

tk, to fediverse
@tk@bbs.kawa-kun.com avatar

Anyone who wasn't on the in the / / days is but a wee gnoob.

youronlyone, to fediverse
@youronlyone@c.im avatar

You can now join the waitlist to Mozilla.Social, Mozilla's 2nd instance.

https://prod.oidc-proxy.prod.webservices.mozgcp.net/waitlist

  • The first fediverse instance of Mozilla was 2010-02-22 to 2013-11-20. Its final name was “Social@Mozilla”.

atomicpoet, to fediversenews
@atomicpoet@mastodon.social avatar

Despite only being validated in February, I think Group federation has been a smashing success for the Fediverse.

I use Fediverse groups every day.

And if you’re interacting with this post, so are you.

Fediverse groups even make Mastodon that much more extensible despite Mastodon itself not officially supporting groups yet.

https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/src/branch/main/feps/fep-1b12.md

@fediversenews

youronlyone,
@youronlyone@c.im avatar

@kristoff

It will depend on the platform. For example, (and to an extent and ), the owner of the group (and anyone else given moderation access) can block accounts. There is also chirp.social which can also block accounts.

Then there is , which is a rebranded itself a rebranded (the first software, c. 2008) have built-in groups feature; which IIRC, can also block users if needed.

Personally, services like Guppe really need to add moderation features, otherwise, what you just described will more likely happen.

@jupiter_rowland @fediversenews

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • anitta
  • everett
  • magazineikmin
  • Durango
  • thenastyranch
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • hgfsjryuu7
  • osvaldo12
  • rosin
  • kavyap
  • mdbf
  • PowerRangers
  • DreamBathrooms
  • modclub
  • khanakhh
  • InstantRegret
  • tacticalgear
  • vwfavf
  • ethstaker
  • ngwrru68w68
  • normalnudes
  • tester
  • GTA5RPClips
  • cubers
  • cisconetworking
  • Leos
  • provamag3
  • All magazines