If game developers would launch their own fediverse instances (maybe with devs + moderators as the only registered users), to which general purpose instances could freely connect, then problems 2 and 3 would be solved for users as well. Imo that would be a far better solution than having game forums on a walled garden platform like discord. That still leaves the devs with problem 1, but they would also regain control of their data + the data would also be searchable with proper search engines. I can dream :)

[–] BorisBoreUs@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

It solves #1 as well because the Lemmy-phile/end user is already apart of an instance that would federate with the game instance.
Administration is taken on by the game company for their own instance, so updating and technical, server side stuff isnt a worry for the end user. As far as the instance owner, its no more difficult to keep updated as it is for other instances. If anything it would be easier because only the devs and company folks would be users of the instance itself so an update doesn't impact their user base directly, there might just be a pause in new content while it was updating

[–] linuxPIPEpower@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

It would be solved for people who are primarily interested in tech and gaming. How about bellow challenges?

Gaming is huge so presumably lots of gamers are interested in the wider world, which is not exactly well represented here compared to the major platforms.

And we can't ignore the inherent complexities of federation. If a user signs up to another instance but for some reason that instance (or game 's instance) is blocked by others or even goes offline, then it will be confusing if not ruining of their experience.

[–] BorisBoreUs@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

If a Lemmy-naut is registered with an instance that's defederated from the game company instance, they can always register at an instance that is federated, either in addition to their main or to replace it. The company's instance would likely act as an info hub, but the gamers wouldn't be members of the instance directly, so it would be like any other content that could be opted into. If it became the norm that games or game companies spun up their own instance, it could become a community and marketing tool for the games. But even if the instances themselves retire, the content made is still around and the existing fans could just start channels to continue the community. Companies that arent complete assholes could even assist with transfer to new channels elsewhere.

I think theres an opportunity down the line for a company/companies to form that specialize in helping orgs to spin up instances and sell their them hosting. Hosting is expensive for small groups to manage, but multiple small groups together could make it viable. Plus having the hosting coupled with help overcoming the tech-knowledge barrier could lead to more orgs feeling comfortable spinning up their own instances.

[–] RunawayFixer@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Well put, and info hub is a great term to describe these limited purpose instances.

[–] Aux@feddit.uk 0 points 1 month ago (3 children)

The problem with your logic is that now you have to have multiple accounts across the "same bloody Lemmy". That kills the whole purpose of a decentralised approach. Defederation should not be a thing at all.

[–] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Instance defederations should be an option in the user settings.

[–] Aux@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago

Yes, that should be a user controlled thing, not an admin controlled instance wide thing.

[–] BorisBoreUs@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Respectfully, i disagree. If a person's main instance defederated from an instance that was set up for a specific game, their main instance is likely doing so for ethical reasons/whim of admins.

If a user of that main instance has values that match with the mission of the instance they will either,

a) not want to be federated with the game instance in the first place, b) only align with a majority of the instance's values and occasionally need an alt to access places defederated from, or c) find a new main since the one they chose is too restrictive for them.

I agree that having alts is annoying. Ideally, there will be options enough for users to find a main instance that they're aligned with so they wouldnt need an alt. Regardless, i still think the game company running their own instance for the specific purpose of the game is where the fediverse ought to head.

I want, as an example, the US Forest Service to have their own instance. It solves two problems. One, the USFS gets to personally interact how they want in the fediverse and federate when they want with who they want (just like the rest of us) and two, Anyone with an @usfs.fedi.gov account could be trusted to actually be who they say they are. I would like this trend to include news outlets, gov angencies, schools, etc. It helps with validating information and provides trusted first-source information directly from orgs.

If the girlscouts changed a girlscout cookie flavor, their @girlscoutsofamerica.federated.social could make the announcement and we could trust the info and be mad that a cookie flavor changed.

[–] linuxPIPEpower@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

We're trying to have an intelligent discussion here.

You think every Lemmy admin should be forced to fed with CSAM instances, and therefor host on their own servers CSAM? Wow great plan you have for expanding the fediverse.

[–] Aux@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Oh, you're one of those "think of the kids" nutjobs!

[–] linuxPIPEpower@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 1 month ago

No I'm one of those "think!" nutjobs

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah, I think a user shouldn't just "exist" on a single instance and the same goes for communities.

And at the same time, an instance owner does need to be able to block things from being federated with themselves. You really do not want any CSAM on hardware you own.

It's tricky to cover everything, and I'm not even going to pretend I've got the answers to it.

[–] linuxPIPEpower@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

But obviously instances blocking other instances is part of it.