I guess what I’m essentially asking here is wether you mind seeing the same post several times in your feed? I’ve done it in the past, but also tend to feel that duplicate posts are a bit annoying.
I guess what I’m essentially asking here is wether you mind seeing the same post several times in your feed? I’ve done it in the past, but also tend to feel that duplicate posts are a bit annoying.
My personal opinion is to pick the top two or three most applicable communities and post there.
As someone who primarily browses Local or All, after seeing the third identical post it starts looking like spam.
This is an easily solvable problem if the front end could just group posts with the same link
I second this. If I see the same question twice in two different communities, I don’t see that as a problem, and if I think it’s an interesting conversation starter, I’ll probably look at both posts, to see all the different comments.
Three feels like the limit. Any more than that is just obnoxious.
Lemmy needs some sort of built-in way to merge them. That’d be the best solution I think. Then you could just pick a list of relevant communities and it’d be pretty seamless
I think the crossposting feature lemmy has effectively does this, but I’m not sure
It’s about halfway there I think, they still show up separately in clients and have separate comments threads.
Correct. It does not funnel all the conversation into the same post, which is probably most people’s preference.
Oh weird, I would not have expected to be in the minority there
For me it’s easy to imagine an article being linked to two communities that are going to have drastically different takes.
[email protected] and [email protected] for example.
Now I can see wanting to have a discussion across both communities, but I can also see /c/cars wanting discuss cars without having every conversation devolve into an argument or admonishment.
As I was writing this another problem came to mind. You have a pooled discussion across two or more communities with two or more moderation policies. How could that be reconciled?
I think you’ve convinced me that it’s a slightly more complicated problem than I initially gave it credit for; thank you for that!
I think you could solve for the disparate community theme problem by also requiring title match for mergers. You could probably also solve for it by having a 2-way merger whitelist on links. E.g community A and B both maintain lists of “similar” communities and then if A’s list contains B and vice-versa they would merge.
Comment moderation I got nothing though. That’s a tough one.