It is, but there’s only one way to make Piefed grow, it’s to start getting Piefed communities more active.

Lemmy covers pretty much all the topics the current Threadiverse is interested in, so at some point posters have to accept to post to smaller communities.

I’m not saying everyone has to do it, but as OP states that Piefed is more polished, I was surprised

Those features also impact all Piefed users.

20 people?

https://piefed.fediverse.observer/dailystats&days=7

360 currently, so around 18 times that.

A separate tool could connect to any server federating “Report” activities.

The appetite seems limited as you pointed out yourself in the comment above.

It would be better/faster/easier to simply build a separate tool that can be useful for moderators,

Piefed built it in their software without a separate tool

Two questions for you, I’m genuinely curious, I hope they don’t come up as agressive

• why are you still using your Lemm.ee account instead of Piefed
• why create this post here instead of !fediverse@piefed.social ?

Valid point

• apps
• alternative front ends
• Comments view / chat view

It may be a bit opiniated, but it’s nice to see a different approach from Lemmy devs who don’t see the need for any additional moderation tool.

I brought up mod mail during the AMA, it has been considered too complex to implement. A moderation panel with an overview of the mod queue would be nice too, but not a priority.

I’m not saying Piefed is perfect, but at least they prioritize that aspect.

I usually agree with you, but here @troed@fedia.io is right.

Full disclosure

With the full disclosure approach, the full details of the vulnerability are made public as soon as they are identified. This means that the full details (sometimes including exploit code) are available to attackers, often before a patch is available. The full disclosure approach is primarily used in response or organizations ignoring reported vulnerabilities, in order to put pressure on them to develop and publish a fix.

This makes the full disclosure approach very controversial, and it is seen as irresponsible by many people. Generally it should only be considered as a last resort, when all other methods have failed, or when exploit code is already publicly available.

Responsible or Coordinated Disclosure

Responsible disclosure attempts to find a reasonable middle ground between these two approaches. With responsible disclosure, the initial report is made privately, but with the full details being published once a patch has been made available (sometimes with a delay to allow more time for the patches to be installed).

https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/Vulnerability_Disclosure_Cheat_Sheet.html#full-disclosure

!instance_assistant@lemmy.ca, not sure if the project is still updated

If you give me a link, I can update the comment

Thanks, crossposted to !fediverse@piefed.social for wider reach

• !fedibridge@lemmy.dbzer0.com
• !fedigrow@lemm.ee

Creator wasn’t aware https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/40704282

Not sure if that’s relevant content for this community

Maybe one solution is to have strong rules and moderation about personal attacks. But then it’s the moderators that will get bullied for censorship and end up crucified on the power tripping bastard community.

When people try to call out power tripping against valid moderation, they get called out on !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Crossposting to !fediverse@piefed.social

Don’t pay too much attention https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/modlog?userId=1220346

Wait until you hear about !thenewdonald@lemmyusa.com

(Sorry for the proprietary service!)

Ouch, brace yourselves, FOSS ninjas incoming 😄