Dear European enthusiasts,

We’re excited to grow Europe Pub and need your help to make it thrive! We’re looking for passionate individuals to join us as community builders and moderators.

What we need:

  1. Community builders to breathe life into our existing communities
  2. Moderators for country-specific communities who speak the native languages

Why native-speaking moderators are crucial: Europe’s beauty lies in its linguistic diversity. We want to replicate this diversity in our country-specific communities. Our goal is to ensure that every European can participate in discussions using their native language. This approach will make Europe Pub truly inclusive and representative of our continent’s rich tapestry of languages and cultures.

This is your chance to contribute to the fediverse movement and create a truly European social network. Let’s break free from centralized American social media and build something that represents our diverse continent.

Whether you’re passionate about European culture, politics, or simply want to connect with fellow Europeans, we’d love to have you on board. No technical expertise required – just enthusiasm, a love for Europe, and fluency in your native European language!

If you’re interested in helping shape Europe Pub, please comment below or send me a message.

Let’s work together to create a vibrant, inclusive space! 🇪🇺

  • Blaze@feddit.nlEnglish
    1·
    1 day ago

    Hello,

    Copy pasting what I put in another post on !BuyFromEU@lemm.ee

    My personal stance on this is that

    If rules, moderation policies and admin policies are similar, there should only be one community on a single topic while we have a userbase below 100k

    This allows for !politics@lemmy.world and !politics@hexbear.net to coexist, as there is a reason for them to (different moderation policies). It’s similar for !climate@slrpnk.net and !climatehope@lemmy.world, as those communities have different principles and perspectives on their topic.

    This suggests to consolidate communities like !movies@lemmy.world and !movies@lemm.ee

    Another recent example is

    These three communities have similar rules, similar moderation and admin policies. They should be consolidated. And I know this is a very controversial topic, but I made a longer post recently on !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com for people interested.

    In summary, my main argument is that

    • even though subscribers can potentially subscribe to all communities on a topic
    • posters are only going to post to one community, because they want the conversation to happen with the most people in one place, which is not the case if you crosspost as the comments gets splintered across the different communities

    To take a recent example

    As a member of both communities, I find it a pain to have two similar communities even more so when both post the exact same content because it creates more noise in my feed and because it forces me to waste my time and energy deciding where I will read said duplicated content and maybe post a comment. The solution is obvious: I will unsubscribe from one (for the time being, I still follow the two communities).

    https://jlai.lu/post/16318139/13038429

    There is a natural tendency of “one community emerges as the main one” on several topics

    If one community does not emerge as the main one, it’s usually because two or more regular posters maintain both communities active by posting to their preferred community.

    So, my suggestions are to consolidate similar communities. This single decision will not make this platform similar to Reddit. On Reddit, you had no way to complain about power tripping mods, there were no public modlogs, and discourse criticizing the mods or the admins would get silenced.

    Here, we have !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com, and recent examples have shown that the community can actually resist power tripping: https://feddit.org/post/7025680/4263481.

    If the mods of the consolidated community start to power trip, document this on !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com and reorganize on the alternative communities. If not, stay on that one community, to foster more active conversations and posts.

    That’s the theory we encourage on !fedigrow@lemm.ee, feel free to join us there to discuss this further.

    • tfmOPMAEnglish
      2·
      1 day ago

      Open to discussion on this.

      I see it like that:

      Consolidation leads to centralization, and centralization creates power structures that go against the core principles of the Fediverse. If too many users concentrate in a single community, it gives disproportionate influence to a small group of admins and moderators. If that community’s instance goes down (as we saw with feddit.de) or if those in charge abuse their power, the entire structure can be destabilized. That’s precisely the kind of problem the Fediverse was built to avoid.

      The idea of migrating communities when moderation becomes problematic sounds good in theory, but in practice, it rarely works, especially as the network scales up. It’s also cumbersome. People don’t want to uproot and start over repeatedly, and large communities don’t just “move” smoothly. Instead, they tend to fracture, lose engagement, or remain stuck under poor leadership.

      it creates more noise in my feed

      I get that, but this feels like a problem that should be solved at the platform level rather than by consolidating communities. People should be able to subscribe to multiple similar communities across different instances, and the feed algorithm should be able to detect and bundle similar posts across these communities. However, it should not decide which content is “best”. It should simply organize the feed more efficiently without interfering with visibility.

      In the end, this is the ongoing dilemma of decentralization: Do we prioritize distribution of power, or do we focus on ease of use? There’s no perfect answer, but we should aim for a balance rather than rushing to consolidate.

      • Blaze@feddit.nlEnglish
        1·
        24 hours ago

        Thank you for your comment

        The idea of migrating communities when moderation becomes problematic sounds good in theory, but in practice, it rarely works, especially as the network scales up. It’s also cumbersome. People don’t want to uproot and start over repeatedly, and large communities don’t just “move” smoothly. Instead, they tend to fracture, lose engagement, or remain stuck under poor leadership.

        People left !moviesandtv@lemm.ee after the power tripping: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/29606682. !showsandmovies@lemm.ee became the most active community

        !onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone is also another example: https://feddit.org/post/7025680/4263481

        get that, but this feels like a problem that should be solved at the platform level rather than by consolidating communities. People should be able to subscribe to multiple similar communities across different instances, and the feed algorithm should be able to detect and bundle similar posts across these communities. However, it should not decide which content is “best”. It should simply organize the feed more efficiently without interfering with visibility.

        This is not going to happen any time soon for Lemmy, and even though Piefed has feeds, the issue stays the same: if a question about European luggage is listed on 3 different communities, people are not going to copy paste their answers in the 3 communities, leading to discussion splintering

        In the end, this is the ongoing dilemma of decentralization: Do we prioritize distribution of power, or do we focus on ease of use? There’s no perfect answer, but we should aim for a balance rather than rushing to consolidate.

        I am in favor of having one community, !buyeuropean@feddit.uk , due to the good track record of the instance admins.

        Should the mods start power tripping, people can organize on !europe@feddit.org

        • tfmOPMAEnglish
          1·
          23 hours ago

          People left !moviesandtv@lemm.ee after the power tripping

          Firstly, !moviesandtv@lemm.ee still has 2,500 subscribers, while !showsandmovies@lemm.ee only has 1,500 at this point. Additionally, the moderators are now directing users to !television@lemm.ee, which has even fewer subscribers (around 200), as mentioned in this post. Rather than a clean transition, this situation has resulted in a fractured community.

          Secondly, in this case, the issue was malicious moderation. Users left because of bad mod behavior, but the real concern remains: admins have the final say. If an admin decides to power trip, the entire community—and potentially the whole instance—falls under their control.

          This brings us back to the exact problem Reddit has. As long as the company aligned with community interests, it could hold rogue moderators accountable. But once Reddit had a financial or ideological agenda, entire communities were left powerless.

          In contrast, a decentralized approach with similar communities on different instances offers a natural fail-safe. If one instance becomes problematic, users can easily regroup on other similar communities rather than having to start from scratch. This ensures continuity and resilience rather than the all-or-nothing risk of centralization.

          If a question about European luggage is listed on three different communities, people are not going to copy-paste their answers in all of them, leading to discussion splintering.

          If Lemmy’s feed algorithm can bundle similar posts, it can also bundle comments. This is a matter of software development, not an inherent flaw in decentralization. Whether or not this happens depends on developer support, but it’s absolutely possible and could even be implemented in frontend apps like Voyager or Thunder.

          The question isn’t whether consolidation is the only way to improve discussion efficiency—it’s whether it’s the best way. And given the risks of power concentration, it seems clear that a better solution lies in improving the tools rather than weakening decentralization.

          I stand by my position, but I’ll leave this discussion open for others to weigh in. Let’s see what the broader community thinks.

          • Blaze@feddit.nlEnglish
            1·
            22 hours ago

            Firstly, !moviesandtv@lemm.ee still has 2,500 subscribers, while !showsandmovies@lemm.ee only has 1,500 at this point. Additionally, the moderators are now directing users to !television@lemm.ee, which has even fewer subscribers (around 200), as mentioned in this post.

            !showsandmovies@lemm.ee is by far the most active community on this topic: (https://lemmyverse.net/communities?query=tv+shows&order=active)

            Subscribers are not a relevant metric as !moviesandtv@lemm.ee was created during the API exodus, but a lot of people left since then. Active users is a better metric.

            Rather than a clean transition, this situation has resulted in a fractured community.

            I know, I am that mod. This decision is actually a way to consolidate the existing communities on that topic

            So this is consolidation rather than fracturing. The first two communities have been locked. Should the mod team of !television@lemm.ee start to power trip, people can ask the lemm.ee admins to get one of the two others communities back and move there.

            Secondly, in this case, the issue was malicious moderation. Users left because of bad mod behavior, but the real concern remains: admins have the final say. If an admin decides to power trip, the entire community—and potentially the whole instance—falls under their control.

            !tenforward@lemmy.world was created as an alternative from power tripping admins on strartrek.website, and is now the most active community about Star Trek. So even power tripping admins can be dealt with. @Stamets@lemmy.world can attest.

            In contrast, a decentralized approach with similar communities on different instances offers a natural fail-safe. If one instance becomes problematic, users can easily regroup on other similar communities rather than having to start from scratch. This ensures continuity and resilience rather than the all-or-nothing risk of centralization.

            You can have alternative communities locked, so that they are ready to be used, but still keep the conversations happening on the main community.

            Whether or not this happens depends on developer support

            Indeed, but it is not implemented at the moment. Should the mods of /r/BuyfromEU ask us which Lemmy community we want to add to their sidebar, which one should give them? Should we give them the 4 of them just because we can’t decide on one?

            The question isn’t whether consolidation is the only way to improve discussion efficiency—it’s whether it’s the best way. And given the risks of power concentration, it seems clear that a better solution lies in improving the tools rather than weakening decentralization.

            Where are the alternative active communities to

            People don’t want to shout into the void. They go where the people are. Another example:

            This is a natural phenomenon. When Lemmy will have a bigger userbase (e.g. 100k monthly active users), we could maybe have parallel communities about specific topics, but at the moment, it seems counterproductive.