The Beehaw project is entering some significant challenges - Beehaw
beehaw.org
There is a lot of discussion happening in the background of our project here. We could not anticipate all of the challenges that we were going to face a few years ago. One of the reasons for this was because we had no idea what our choice of a platform would bring. Specifically, we chose Lemmy as the software that we would use to launch our endeavor to attempt a safe space for marginalized persons online. In the first year or so, this choice was completely successful for a very small number of users. And then we all experienced an enormous influx of users when Reddit announced/implemented their shutting down of third party apps. Since then there has been a huge number of people that have joined the Beehaw project. This tsunami of users initiated technical problems, and otherwise, that we could not foresee. Thankfully and fortunately, we have had a couple of incredibly knowledgeable persons that have swooped in to ’save the day’ and keep this site running. Unfortunately, these persons will NOT be able to continue to support the Beehaw project much further. They have life commitments and other factors, including careers and family life, that will prevent them from contributing to our project in an ongoing fashion. All that being said, Lemmy (the software that Beehaw runs on) development is incredibly slow and is riddled with problems that makes administration/moderation very painful. Therefore, we are left with some options that may feel uncomfortable to us. For example, we may want to consider leaving the Fediverse for another software platform that does NOT include ActivityPub. To explain, Fediverse/ActivityPub are very positive concepts on the foundational level. However, the Beehaw project is struggling to include this because most of our moderation/content/ethos is being jeopardized from OTHER federated instances (i.e. it, mostly, is NOT coming from within our own Beehaw registered user base). The aforementioned persons, that have ’swooped in to save the day’, have been discussing/working with us to come up with the best solutions that would enable the Beehaw project to continue while NOT needing incredibly experienced/technically adept persons around. Right now, we are testing alternative software platforms and evaluating them based on everything that we want Beehaw to become in the future. Thank you all for your continued support of the Beehaw project and entrusting us to make this happen.
  • aksdb@feddit.deEnglish
    19·
    1 year ago

    Can someone ELI5 what Beehaw is? Their post says that the lemmy instance is just part of a large project, but the beehaw website is the lemmy instance. So what is this project? What makes them special? Google also just shows me their lemmy instance and their subreddit.

    • BananaTrifleViolin@kbin.social
      208·
      1 year ago

      Beehaw is trying to be a “safe place” social network. They want to be a social network, welcoming to people, but also protect their community. They want people to be nice, and won’t tolerate people being intolerant (racism, homophonic, sexist, transphobic, or bigoted).

      I’d argue that In a lot of these things their can be some nuance in all those terms but in Beehaw expect a more absolutionist interpretation of those terms.

      I understand what they’re trying to do. But to give you an idea of what the result is (in my opinion) - when I mentioned free speech there I was lectured that the term is a right wing dog whistle term. I would describe them as a intolerantly tolerant place - either you ascribe to their absolutionist views or you don’t. That is just my experience though.

      Beehaws influence has been disproportionate as they were one of the bigger communities during the recent Reddit influxes. They don’t want to be the biggest, they want to protect and nurture their own community. I get it but I think it was inevitable that would not work with federating.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        3016·
        1 year ago

        intolerantly tolerant

        That’s because it’s required to not tolerate intolerance in order to be tolerant.

        Free speech is a right wing dog whistle at this point as it’s used to justify being able to say whatever people want to say no matter the impact on others. What people who invoke free speech need to realose is that it’s protected in public spaces, not in private spaces and it’s a purely American thing, even in Canada the freedom of expression doesn’t allow people to propagate hate. I don’t know where Beehaw is hosted but if it’s not in the USA it’s even more ridiculous to talk about free speech on it.

        • shrugal@lemm.eeEnglish
          53·
          1 year ago

          The thing about free speech is that it matters most when you don’t agree with the other person.

            • shrugal@lemm.eeEnglish
              01·
              1 year ago

              That those kinds of situations are exactly why free speech exists: People want to articulate thoughts in front of an audience that is opposed to them. What they are saying may be bad (depending on your PoV), but the fact that they can invoke free speech to say it is important (excl. harmful stuff like hate speech ofc).

              Claiming to support free speech when nothing controversial is being said is just cheap talk.

    • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
      1012·
      1 year ago

      it’s a toxic echo chamber that claims to be a “safe space”, in which you either contribute to the(ir) echo, or you get banned

        • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
          51·
          1 year ago

          I once got told that if I even tried to defend or discuss my point of view (after the first and only comment on that thread), I’ll be banned. Because I said that if you randomly pick out someone from a random population, you’re less likely to pick a minority, because they’re a minority. And that’s how statistics works.

          • legless velociraptor@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            1·
            1 year ago

            Beside the point, but maybe still worthmentioning: if the “majority” is in truth just another minority, but the biggest one, with, say, 15% of the population, and therefore by default calls itself the majority, you’re still more likely to pick an individual of one of the 24 other minorities. What you’re unlikely to do, is to pick an individual of a specific minority, no matter which one. The “least unlikely” is an individual of said “majority”, because it’s the biggest minority. It’s still relatively unlikely, though, and likelier to pick an individual of some other minority, just not any specific one.

            • vrighter@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
              0·
              1 year ago

              yes, but you still have a higher probability of picking one of those than any other individual one of the others. you do have a higher probability of picking any other than that single one, but that’s not saying much. If you pick a random sample, the biggest minority will still be the biggest minority.