I have a number of Lemmy instances meant for discussion groups around specific topics. They are not being as used as I expected/hoped. I would like to set them up in a way that they can be owned by a consortium of different admins so that they are collectively owned. My only requirement: these instances should remain closed for registrations and used only to create communities.

  • rglullis@communick.newsOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t mean universal in the sense of “totalitarian”, I mean it in the sense of “large common denominator”.

    Do you think that the conversation around, e.g, python programming or wood turning techniques will vary so much that it warrants many specific flavors?

    it’s likely to be skewed towards whatever culture exists in western english-speaking countries

    This is good enough for most people and does not hinder the ability of those that are in the minority to create a different/specialized community.

    Centralization/decentralization is a spectrum. No one is proposing to force everyone into a single box. The idea is only to combine efforts for the things that exist in common and to avoid unnecessary redundancies.

    • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Do you think that the conversation around, e.g, python programming or wood turning techniques will vary so much that it warrants many specific flavors?

      I don’t see why not. Human culture is like a fractal after all :P. At least I don’t think we should discourage creating different places for the same topics, because different approaches is part of decentralization.

      • rglullis@communick.newsOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        At least I don’t think we should discourage creating different places for the same topics

        I’m not discouraging it. To repeat: the idea is not to push a “there can be only one” mentality, but to set up a system that can work well for the 80% of people who can be satisfied with the median case.