We currently have quite a few:
- [email protected] (most active, has had federation delays in the past)
- [email protected] (active poster, topic-appropriate instance)
- [email protected] (active poster, inactive moderator)
- [email protected] (low activity, unmoderated)
- [email protected] (no active posters or moderators)
Dead instances
Do each of these communities serve a distinct purpose? If not, should we consolidate some of them?
I think the ManderXYZ instance is a nice match for the topic, but I am interested to hear what others think.
Now that you are moderator in both, would you be able to do the following?
!space@mander.xyz
”Thanks! Bitswap made the post, so we should be good to go now
Awesome! Are you planning to copy the rules from the sidebar as well, or start from scratch?
I’ve prepped one here. @[email protected], how does this look? I simplified the rules somewhat by combining related rules. Also I don’t think the astronomy picture of the day was working so I removed it and kept the link
A community to discuss space & astronomy through a STEM lens
Rules
Also keep in mind, mander.xyz's rules on politics
Related Communities
🔭 Science
🚀 Engineering
🌌 Art and Photography
Other Cool Links
Yeah. Looks good. Thanks Otter!
One thing to think about is that recently we had a few requests to create a rule about quality sources. I was always torn about it. The post with links to bad sources/bad science brought out some of the highest engagement from the whole community and spurred some great educational dialogs.
I don’t like the idea of keeping a disallowed list of sources. Nor do I like the idea of debating source quality.
I agree, at our current moderation capacity it would lead to inconsistent moderation and arguments about where the ‘quality threshold’ is
Encouraging people to post better quality sources through comments might be better than fully restricting the posts?