A number of brand new accounts have popped up shilling their paid for applications.
Is this within the rules? Is the community happy with this? Could mods clarify this in the rules?
Either allowing advertising, or banning it entirely.
my point is - there is a difference between an open source homegrown project that might be useful, vs closed source paid for projects from brand new accounts
some replies are misunderstanding, somehow.
I am against
brand new accounts who:
- first post is a brand new project
- project is closed source
- project will cost money
- is asking for free testing
- the post is literally an advertisement
LOVE the discussion folks, and @breadsmasher@lemmy.world you beat me to it, this has been bothering me all week.
I would love to see a consensus come out of this, maybe do a vote on wording/requirements? Idk, still working on figuring out the best approach.
Just a thanks for exactly the meta threads I hoped for.
As I’m doing things right now, closed source, paid, and the only thing posted is getting removed as spam. Unfortunately a common time seems to be about 7am GMT (side note - folks who are on around that time and can help with modding then, please reach out) and I’m not on for a good few hours at a minimum.
That said, I always read and check, sometimes deferring to read again and check the profile when I have more time later.
What I’m looking for at the moment is:
- Are people asking questions to see if this is crap being peddled for a profit? Is OP answering? (And thanks again to the folks who do follow up with great questions that dig into this right away)
- Does it read like a post from a person?
- How old is the account?
- How many other posts have they made? Where and what about?
That kind of stuff. Sometimes its super easy to spot (3 posts, same title, price and it being cloud only, etc), sometimes its not and takes more looking.
I think paid products can have a place here, despite them not being my kind of thing, but more as a discussion.
So if there is some degree of consensus on a good rule, I would suggest making a post about it so we can finalize, like I did for the rule 3 updates.
And if anyone has an idea on a useful option for a voting style solution for things like this, I’d love for a DM so I can check it out.
I would like some clarity on general apparent self-promotion of open source projects as well. As in, points 1-4 don’t apply and 5 depends on your definition of “advertisement”.
I’m bringing this up because I (once) previously attempted to share a project1 I maintain on here. I did take some effort to include some context and discussion points for selfhosters in order to make it more tailored and stay safe on Rule 3. It was quickly removed by mod. I tried reaching out to one of the mods to try to understand what was wrong. They were friendly and said they weren’t involved and would forward to the relevant people and since then I haven’t heard back. It would be very helpful to be able to get some feedback on why submission was removed so we can learn how future submission attempt could be improved (or abandoned).
1: FLOSS, no commercial or otherwise proprietary parts or relations, no slop or clank in the process
I don’t really use this community, but I ban a lot of accounts that talk like an AI, use em dashes excessively, and come to this community to promote “their” projects. 🤔
I think its funny that anyone who has closed source software thinks the best place to advertise it is in the federation. I love the fediverse but if it was the fact that it was gnu that I checked it out. I would totally not be here if it was closed source.
That’s kind of the defining feature of spam. Not thinking if it’s appropriate or good, just sending everywhere because some of it will generate clicks.
“Just delete it” or “scroll past” is not a useful response. Spam is infinite unless it’s blocked and/or punishable.
This is the selfhosted community. Not the Free, Open Source community.
I think you can infer the rules from the name here. The stuff you post must be related to software you can host on your own hardware. It need not be free, nor open source.
Now your point about spam from brand new accounts that are literally just ads on the other hand is valid.
I think they should be allowed. However, I wouldn’t even date to touch them with a stick from afar in VR.
Plex was the last proprietary thing I ever selfhosted and it’s been a perfect reminder.
if they are obviously bot or dedicated marketing accounts, then no I dont think they should be here.
However, I’m not 100% opposed to closed source/paid software being discussed here, but it should clearly marked as such, with a flair that people can filter out if they so choose.
If someone posts asking about whether there are any alternatives to a paid closed source program, that’s a totally valid conversation, and if it turns out there is no FOSS alternative, then we have to talk about paid closed alternatives, find the one that offers the best value and vet for trustworthiness.
The rules say nothing about selling a paid service, but maybe “no spam” should be updated with some clarity on self promotion, so perhaps you can self promote your FOSS service with the appropriate flair, but if you are selling a paid closed service it shouldn’t be allowed?
discussing a product is not the same as someone literally advertising their paid for product.
are you ok with advertising on this community?
if they are obviously bot or dedicated marketing accounts, then no I dont think they should be here.
I would like the rules to make clear what is acceptable.
self promotion of a FOSS project is acceptable in my opinion, as long as it is clearly titled as self promotion and isn’t done in a spamming way (such as carpet bombing multiple communities with bot posts). I’d also say that donation-seeking in those posts should be kept to the creators own web pages, not in the posts themselves too.
there is a pretty easy line to draw for what is blatant advertising and what is genuine discussion of a paid service. that’s not that hard to moderate, especially when accounts are new, and carpet bombing the same posts to multiple communities, that is clearly spam.
I think new accounts that show up to shil their app should be banned. They’re not actively participating in the community, it’s just spam. There’s been a huge uptick recently.
I think new accounts that show up to shil their app should be banned.
What if the new account user, who is working on a product that integrates with what the vast majority of selfhosters run, just found Lemmy? Lemmy selfhosted doesn’t exactly share the same popularity as say Reddit. It doesn’t just roll off the tongue. I had to vigorously try to find Lemmy before I got here.
What if the new account user, who is working on a product that integrates with what the vast majority of selfhosters run, just found Lemmy?
This happens on Reddit, and basically my problem is that these users often don’t have enough experience to be able to actually give solutions. Reddit is full of people who think they have a good solution, dealing with comments of people explaining that what they are struggling with is actually a solved problem (or a skill issue). No one cares about your vibecoded slop that implements 1% of the features of an existing open source solution (they used to not be vibecoded but we still didn’t care). It being paid and proprietary is just even more annoying.
My idea of requirement to engage with the community is also about being able to ensure that the users are technically competent. If they are experienced, it will show up in the discussions we can see and review. For their benefit, if they lurk, then they can take a look at what is being used, and what problems actually exist, instead of making assumptions.
If they really believe their product is so good, they can spend a few weeks helping people with Linux questions and sharing their (non product related) insightful thoughts on Lemmy so I don’t dismiss them instantly when they finally advertise it.
That sounds like you’re describing someone who is only making a lemmy account because they see potential customers they want to advertise to.
That’s the exact reason I don’t want someone to make a lemmy account.
“Lurk for a while before posting,” has been a standard rule of netiquette for at least the 30 years that I’ve been using the 'net.
I would tend to agree with that. Maybe OP didn’t think of that.
They did think about that, apparently you did not. Did you not see that they specifically said “brand new” accounts? Or are you talking about the most recent OP that posted an ad to beta test closed source software?
If all they have to contribute is self promotion I think they should be banned.
They should hang out a while first and not have only posts promoting their software, and not only have comments in those threads.
The lemmy attitude is very anti commercialization, and they don’t know any better. That doesn’t mean we should allow it.
They should hang out a while first and not have only posts promoting their software, and not only have comments in those threads.
I tend to agree.
The lemmy attitude is very anti commercialization
The lemmy attitude is like chaff in the wind.
are they charging? is it open source?
They aren’t charging you. The OP/DEV in question is willing to give their product away. A product that integrates with your opensource *arr stack. All he wanted to know is, 'Would you be interested in beta testing it?"
I mean, there was recently a new user here who intro’d himself as a Windows selfhoster. He was pretty much welcomed with open arms, with a few snarky remarks, but welcomed. How much more closed source could you get than Microsoft Windows? What’s is the actual difference here?
Lmao, the OP you’re talking about literally said that “It’s a paid closed source app”. Why are you not mentioning that little tidbid?
“It’s a paid closed source app”. Why are you not mentioning that little tidbid?
I assumed everyone has a decent reading skills?
that is incredibly misleading.
its not someone asking advice about a closed source app. its someone shilling their own paid for product.
why are you ok with advertising for paid for products being shoved down your throat?
they arent “willing to give it away”. theyre willing to give it to testers for free labour to test their paid for app.
why are you ok with advertising for paid for products being shoved down your throat?
No one, not one living soul that has graced the halls of Lemmy selfhosted since I’ve been here has shoved anything down anyone’s throat. Are you not master of your own domain? Do you not possess self control? Additionally, I chart my own course. I don’t let hive mind tell me what I can and can’t selfhost or use in relation to my server.
they arent “willing to give it away”. theyre willing to give it to testers for free labour to test their paid for app.
So, to recap, they’re going to give their app, which is closed source but integrates with what most selfhosters host, to beta testers, who are interested, and in return, the beta testers get to keep the app for free. I see no free labor.
It was said when rule 3 was being discussed, that there are so few selfhosters out here, why gatekeep?
Yes, but all of your comments seem to miss the fact that this post is talking about paid software. Which is what the OP you’re talking about and defending did. You also said “they aren’t charging you”, which might be true for now, but they will make money off of beta tester’s free labor.
but they will make money off of beta tester’s free labor.
That’s exactly how beta testing works. I’ve mentioned, I do a lot of beta testing for BetaBound. I’m currently beta testing a rumba floor sweeper knock off. WHen I’m done, the company says ‘thank you’ by letting me keep the rather pricey product. Are they going to make money? Of course they will. That’s why they started business…to make money.
You can start with timed bans, so they get the point
I’m here for genuine interactions with other people. So I’m not a fan of ads from brand new accounts that will never engage with the community or enrich it.
At it’s heart, this is what @selfhosted is meant for:
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don’t control.
I would say that members talking about paid/closed products they use (ex. “I connect to this via Tailscale” or “I use company ABC for hosted VPS”) to accomplish something is fine, but marketing or job boarding (ex. “Looking for QA on my commercial product”) is not.
I don’t want this community, or any community on Lemmy for that matter, to become a lucrative platform for advertisers. If someone wants to promote their own product that they made, they should have some credibility as a real person beforehand. Not a brand-new account trying to sell a subscription to an app that’s essentially still in open beta.
I don’t think “selfhosting” and “paid for” goes hand in hand because, at the end of the day, the application somehow will still contact some authentication server or some similar bullshit. That’s the contrary of what most people want from selfhosting.
I think this community should stick to actual OSS, free applications, not some semi-corporate bullshit.
I selfhost because I want to be in control of my data and own it. Closed software is the antithesis of that. They’re just bots trying to advertise their software.
I want to be in control of my data and own it. Closed software is the antithesis of that
So, please do share how your homelab has indexed the entire global internet, so you can use your 100% selfhosted, 100% open source search engine? I’m very interested. I’ve always wanted to run a search engine that is not tied to someone else’s.
That’s a petty troll response to a legitimate statement of what someone wants (which aligns with this group’s stated focus), where they aren’t claiming what they have done
It’s not trolling at all. You stated you got into self hosting because you wanted opensource and you want to retain all of your data. I’m asking you to share your homelab set up. A lot of people would be genuinely interested. The point being, all the gnashing of teeth is a duplicitous argument. If you truly do as you stated, then I’m wondering how you search a global internet from your homelab that indexes it all.
Removed by mod
There’s no respect in that statement and thats not appropriate here. Lets calm it down and keep it a discussion, not aggression and attacks.
That’s fair, thanks for cleaning up the mess and sorry for being part of it.
Removed by mod
reverts to personal attacks
good job friend. very grown up
Removed by mod
Thanks for letting me and everyone else know you’re childish and stupid enough to be worth blocking.
Kind for kind.
It’s not trolling at all
Sigh… As always, life must be balanced. You can’t go from one extreme to the other. It’s a spectrum. I self-host what I deem important in order to keep it under my control and not on a capitalist platform.
It’s an adventure, each month, you learn more and realize that you can host more services yourself.
I self-host what I deem important in order to keep it under my control and not on a capitalist platform.
And I applaud you for that. However, the fact remains, that not everyone selfhosts for the same reasons. I got into selfhosting because I wanted to be as private, as secure, and as anonymous as I could be. However, I do thoroughly enjoy learning how to do things on my server. At my age, it’s good to keep what’s left of my brain active. I genuinely like to tinker. I do also make concessions.
I looked at the rules, and I can’t find anything about closed source. I did find ‘without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don’t control.’ The reason this thread exists is because some people think closed source that integrates with selfhosted, opensource, is 100% out, and I find no evidence of such. It also states ‘Be civil: we’re here to support and learn from one another. Insults won’t be tolerated.’ Civility: Hey is this open source? Was it vibe coded? Ok no thanks bro.’ It sure isn’t the dog pile on the rabbit we see most of the time here when something AI, paid for, or closed source that integrates with opensource threads show up.
I agree that 100% asking selfhosters to outright buy something should be out. We’ve seen a few of these. But, again, the reason this thread was started was because a dev asked a bunch of selfhosters to beta test an app that integrates with what most here run, and in return for your efforts, he will let you keep the app if you so desire. So, you actually do retain control. You can pass. You can beta test. You can uninstall. Your choice.
Self-hosting is a community effort in which the whole community helps each other to self-host their data, including programming the services people use for this purpose. The problem with closed-source software is that we don’t know what’s happening behind the scenes, or if it’s indeed sending telemetry.
Even worse, if that service is ever no longer supported or updated, I’ll be left with data on my server that can’t be used to its full potential, and a service that won’t receive security updates.
Open-source software, on the other hand, is a community effort. If, for example, software is no longer updated or supported, it can easily be forked, and my data can be transferred to the new service.
deleted by creator
Advertised? I’d vote no. Discussed? I’m all for it.
Eh, that may just promote a lot of “What are your opinions about x” posts where the first comment is the ad. Suppose it’s an open call to list alternatives though.
Should be a mod decision, but posters should be community participants/contributors.
Just going to say that to me its a community decision. I’m the janitor here, thats all.
This is actually a post that beat me to the punch, and in glad it did. This is a discussion that needs to be had.
On reddit, there is a community called r/progressionfantasy, which is about a specific type of fantasy fiction. They have a rule that self promotional posts (for paid books) must be preceeded by 10 comments, and actual engagement with the community.
This is a reasonable compromise, in my opinion. Known community member who has been answering questions and contributiting to discussions?
I would be okay if they dropped a paid product of good quality and with a reasonable business model (please no vibecoded slop).
But drive by ProductNameAccount users who have never posted on lemmy before a bunch of self promotional posts? Yeah ban that shit.
With the advent of AI bots trying to flood into Lemmy communities, I don’t really see this as a viable option on the long run.
It is possible to detect and moderate them, as long as your mods haven’t been disappeared and replaced by people who’s job is to accept bribes. And also when we can actually see people’s history, since reddit now has an option to hide your history from others because of course.
My usual method is to focus on content, rather than writing style. The AI bots can write a lot, or be brief, or whatever, but they don’t actually contribute to the discussion. They just kinda paraphrase and restate what has been said, or when trying to sell a product they disagree and go “Are you sure this isn’t an problem?” to everybody in the thread telling them that it’s actually a skill issue.
Sometimes they’ll be a little better, but it’s often surface level stuff that can be found at the top of a google search of keywords.
This also makes it possible to tell the difference between ESL speakers who are using AI to clean up their writing style, and true bots. Since the ESL speakers will actually have something to say, but bots won’t.
And then: https://xkcd.com/810/
