Hey, I gave this a watch but their use of the word ‘local’ doesn’t match mine in this case. When I use the word local, I’m referring to a geographic area, or at least a server that represents a geographic area. It looks like when local-first talk about local, they’re referring to interaction on a device. It would be nice to be able to have habitat not require an internet connection to queue a post, this is a great idea and I’ll look into that, but their point on “it should still work on device if the remote server is down (or even disappears forever)” I don’t believe is possible when we’re building a community platform. Or, at least, if such a thing is possible, I wouldn’t know where to begin. I appreciate the heads-up though, I love that such a group exists.

I haven’t, but I will absolutely look at this on the weekend! Thanks so much

Thanks for this! 😃 I have been going back and forth on the idea of providing the end user with the ability to create their own categories. I was wondering whether it would be better to have an Other type category which the admin can react to and create categories as needed, but your post has pushed me back to the idea of allowing category creation. I think if I do implement that, I’ll have a switch for it, so that the instance admin can choose.

Thanks! Worst case scenario is that I’ll learn a lot and have fun doing so.

😀 that’s great to hear! Thanks

Hey, you asked to be kept updated, so I thought I’d let you know that I have been working on Habitat: https://carlnewton.github.io/posts/building-habitat/

Ha! Funnily enough I just responded to a different comment along these same lines: that’s the beauty of the fediverse. If a community of moaners exist, they could have their own instance. Or in the case of Lemmy (and the very theoretical Habitat), their own categories that other users can tune out from. I think you’re going to have places in which moderation is a success and places in which it isn’t. Anything that isn’t moderated appropriately and gets taken down as a result of something actually illegal won’t affect the communities that are appropriately moderated, because it can all be separated. It seems to be working well enough for Lemmy.

I think that’s the beauty of the fediverse though. Any community can be anything you want it to be. If some users don’t like how an instance is being used, they could create a competing instance that’s more aimed that their wants and needs.

Thanks for this. Perhaps invite only could work. When I signed up to my Lemmy instance, I was asked to say something nice about the UK to prove that I wasn’t a bot. I imagine this could work with a local quiz. But I personally favour the idea of it being open and communities being so small that it wouldn’t really benefit anyone to abuse. But it would certainly be nice to have the administration tools to quickly put a stop to it if it does occur. Something to think about. Thanks

I can’t seem to find anything relevant when I search for Topix, but I think we learn to moderate our local communities effectively. Just like here on Lemmy. The difference being that owners will have fewer people to moderate, so it should in theory be easier. If an owner is vile, create a competing instance.

I hadn’t heard of Yikyak, but it looks very similar to my mock-up. Thanks

Yes, I discovered this for myself yesterday after getting a lot of suggestions that it won’t catch on. I can do my best to foster my own community. If others do the same, that’s a bonus!

Hey, I’ve been looking into the idea of using population density as an indicator of how big a community should be, but it didn’t feel right that the platform would be deciding the boundaries of each community. I then thought about the idea that the owner, upon setup, would draw a shape on a map that would indicate the boundaries of their desired community. How do you feel that solution would that solution work around your river?

Hey, thanks for this. I think I want the same. I don’t think the idea of being able to follow a profile to see what else someone has posted, or to even be able to private message someone on the platform. The focus being only the place of interest.

fear that every country might have it’s own unique problems, but I’ll look into postcodes, thanks.

This is a really interesting point regarding road Vs actual distances, and large areas that are thinly populated being considered local. Australia certainly comes to mind. I suppose the right thing to do about the latter would be to give both users and owners control over search and area sizes.

The quiet feed point is my biggest concern to be honest. It worked out for Lemmy and Mastodon, but it took revolts from their privately owned counterparts to get them to the place they are now.

Is that a matrix address? I don’t know what this is, I’ll look into it. Thanks for the feedback. It isn’t quite how I envision it but it sounds like a lot of people are in favour of local communities, and it appears we don’t have a solution on the fediverse for that yet.

It’s such a joy to read this kind of feedback, and to know that not only would it be enjoyable to have such a platform, but you can foresee that it would be useful. I think I might ask some developers who have experience with building decentralised platforms to see if they think there would be technical issues.

I like this! This is an interesting and probably an effective idea for addressing the issue of desolate communities. It does introduce a new issue though. Let’s say for the sake of argument, I created an instance where I lived, and it engulfed the British isles, and then after some time, a new instance was created in Scotland. The posts that were previously made in my (now England) instance that are geographically located in Scotland would need to be transferred to the Scottish instance, because otherwise, they would never be found using the relevant instance finding technique that I’ve described. This doesn’t sound like a terrible technical issue (though probably not an entirely trivial one given that you don’t want to have all of your posts hijacked by a bad actor), but it does sound like a data/privacy issue, in that the users who posted that data have essentially had it transferred to the ownership (and moderation decisions) of somebody else without permission. An interesting thought none the less. I’d prefer the platform to be as simple as possible but if it can’t be picked up due to a lack of interest then that would be a design flaw. On the other hand, I suppose it’ll be in the interest of each owner to foster their own community.

Thanks for this. I like the idea of local libraries being the hub of community connection. If I get a strong impression that people would want this, and if I get the impression that I can do a better job of building such a platform than anyone else willing to do so, I’ll be sure to contact my local library. At the moment, I’m still on the fence on both counts, given that I don’t believe the idea has yet garnered the attention of anyone who has experience developing for decentralised platforms. I’m hopeful though. It sounds like a fun project, but it would be a shame to get to the end of it without help and nobody actually wants it, or to work away at it and find something I’ve overlooked will prevent it from happening. I’ll keep my ear to the ground for a little while.