Official Administration Guidelines and User Information
Programming.dev finally got official administration guidelines. This document codifies what has up until now only been loosely discussed topics throughout the year in the private administration chat channels.
We hope that by putting the guidelines into writing and making them public, we can ensure a consistent level of moderation by the administration team. But also more importantly, let everyone know by what guidelines and metrics the administration team should follow, making it easier for you guys to hold us accountable and report any instances of an administrator overstepping their role, or decisions you disagree with.
While the primary focus of the document is aimed at administrators specifically, it also includes information to users on how they can contact the admin team if they want to report another admin for deviating from our guidelines.
As always, feedback is more than welcome and we would be happy to discuss any thoughts you may have on our guidelines, nothing is ever pe
When on communities hosted by programming.dev, please follow our Code of Conduct. Repeated breaches of our CoC will lead to a temporary ban from our instance.
Got it. I saw that Vacant was then in the mod list, I've transferred the community to you (based on seniority) and removed Vacant from the moderator list.
Hi, is the other moderator inactive/stepping away?
Just a reminder that section "3.6. Vote Manipulation" of programming.dev's CoC prohibits targeted downvotes and mass downvoting of posts. You've already broken it by mass downvoting JokeDeity's old posts, please don't break it further. If you keep breaking our CoC, a temporary ban may be given.
It is a precautionary policy to avoid what is currently just a theoretical. You'll be the first to create personal blog community so it will be interesting to see how it works out.
Nothing is set in stone of course and policies may be revised, I won't make any claim that the current set of guidelines are perfect and immutable.
The intention of requiring a 3rd party to act as a moderator is to avoid mod abuse from the blog author such as deleting comments or banning people for unreasonable reasons. E.g. someone correcting an error in a blog post and then having their comment deleted and banned by the author in retaliation.
Ideally Lemmy would have more granular level of mod authorisation so that we could just remove access to deleting and banning people.
If someone makes a non-relevant post in the community, it would be removed. If it becomes a recurring problem, we can look into automating that process.
Huh, I wasn't aware that the alternate frontends offered more utility. Looks pretty nice actually, thanks for the tip.
Programming.dev offers the tesseract frontend here: https://t.programming.dev/
The mod tools are unfortunately pretty poor on Lemmy. For adding/removing moderators via the GUI the person must first post/comment in that specific community. You can then via the context menu of that post/comment add someone as a mod.
The alternative is to interact with the Lemmy API directly via a script.
I've added myself as a moderator, although the whole admin team may operate as moderators, similar to [email protected].
If you got additional changes you want to make to the community, e.g. add additional rules like make it explicit that only you can post, or add a banner to the community you should do it now before you're removed as a moderator. Otherwise you can always DM me/the admin team if you want to make changes to it.
Edit: As Blaze pointed out, you can use alternate frontends like https://t.programming.dev/ to gain additional GUI mod tools
Hi, we have now published official community guidelines as announced in this post.
Please let us now in the linked post if there is still something unanswered.
Official Community Guidelines are now published
Programming.dev now has official community guidelines. These should help clarify what sort of local communities we allow to be hosted on the instance and the rules we expect them to follow.
As most programmers are aware, anticipating every edge case is generally not viable, so these are just guidelines, not written-in-stone rules. The admin team will still evaluate communities on a case-by-case basis, and exceptions are always possible.
If you have any feedback on the guidelines, we are more than happy to hear them, so please post them below.
Yeah, we ban the spam accounts on the first report we receive.
Yeah, no problem. Funnily enough Nottingham Forest already had the alias nottingham stored.
Here's every club alias for the bot:
If you can't see posts you make on hidden communities that you are subscribed to on your profile, that sounds like a possible bug, and I'd encourage you to report the issue to the Lemmy repo
I don't believe the system is that granular. If you're posting in a community that is now hidden I would recommend you to subscribe to it if you want to continue to see it.
Does this instance have a concrete guideline or precedent for that or would be able to decide at the discretion of an admin?
Communities with no connection to programming culture are removed as a general rule. Other than that, it's decided on a case by case basis. It's not that uncommon for us to remove new communities that are created. We've removed the community + one another
I've replied to dessalines
It's perhaps poorly phrased, no it will only affect that specific user.
@[email protected] @[email protected] As you requested
A list of hidden communities on programming.dev is now public
As a follow up to our previous announcement post, we have now set up a page to display every community that is hidden for our local users.
As explained on that page:
Programming.dev will hide political communities, NSFW/pornographic communities and communities that have a majority of their content produced by bots. While a community is hidden, it and its posts and comments will not show up in post feeds or in the search results unless you have explicitly subscribed to it. Communities themselves currently do not show up in community search results, this may change in the future; see #2943.
Users can subscribe to a hidden community to remove the hidden effect status of a community, however it can be difficult for a user to find out which communities are due to them not being searchable.
You could theoretically just loop through every community via "get_communities" and then
com_obj["community_view"]["community"]["hidden"] :: boolean
*I'm writing this on memory, the json structure may be slightly different
and then just subscribe to every community that pops up.
It will likely be slow though, and it's mostly NSFW + [email protected] that would pop up on c/all if you did. I also think* lemmygrad as an instance is hidden, so those communities may pop up if they tend to reach c/all.
I'll discuss with the team about making a public list of hidden communities.
I could see one if the ids in the table, but querying the community id via the API doesn't work. Not sure
[email protected] is now set as hidden (unless you subscribe)
As per our policy of hiding political communities, pornographic communities and communities hosting bot spam, [email protected] is now set to hidden as its content is mainly USA centric political news.
Those of you who want to continue to see posts from [email protected] are encouraged to subscribe to the community, which will make the it visible for your account.
The mods over [email protected] have already been notified of this move and understand our decision, please do not bother them by pinging them here.
A previous announcement post of other hidden communities can be seen here
New set of communities made hidden
We have over a period of time gotten repeated reports of unmarked NSFW posts in certain communities. All of these communities share the same singular mod, who have shown indifference when content has been reported. As leaving NSFW posts unmarked is against our instance rules, we have moved to set the rule-breaking communities to hidden.
Those of you who subscribe to hidden communities will continue to see them as normal, for everyone else these communities will look empty and hidden from c/all.
The newly hidden communities are:
Checking admin status of user via the API
Sorry if this is the wrong community, not sure where else to post the question, and I'd rather avoid creating an issue over on Github.
Is there a way to check if a federated user is an administrator via the API? .get_person_details() will have the admin field set to false for all other than local admins and .get_community() only reveals the list of moderators.
I know I could scrape the admin list from the main page html, but scraping html is prone to errors if an instance uses an alternative frontend or the frontend is updated. Getting the data via the API should be a more stable solution.
Based on #3703 it seems like a decent chance that this information isn't currently exposed to federated instances though?
Looking for new moderators #302
Describe the problem
3/4 moderators of the community are inactive, leading to a backlog of unresolved reports from the community.
Suggested solution
Find 1-2 active programming.dev users in the community volunteering to moderate c/programmer_humor in the comments of this post.
Expected time cost
A few minutes each week, the volume of the reports from the community is currently low.
Temporary solution
The community will be moderated by the admin community team until new moderators are found.
Overview of planned features?
Are there any websites or posts where one can see planned features for the app? It would be nice to know what's missing from the initial release. I see plenty of feature requests, but none contains confirmation of whether that feature will be worked on or not.