Instance owners are responsible for the content that is mirrored on their instance through federation, so they definitely should.

But I think in terms of federated content, you cannot be expected to do more than send information about the deletion out. If other instances don’t respect it, it’s not the originating instance’s job to police it.

It actually is.

When delegating the processing of PII to someone else (like another instance), you’re supposed to initiate a data processing agreement with them: https://gdpr.eu/what-is-data-processing-agreement/

Unless Mastodon has somehow automated this process in inter-instance communication, they are just as liable as Lemmy is.

In that case just append a unique string to your comments.

As others have already said, including a Creative Commons license does not make a difference.

Your instance will still exist, and federation should continue as normal if you manage to reclaim the original domain.

If you have to switch to a new one, however, federation will be very awkward. Other instances will essentially treat you as a brand-new instance, and mirrors of old content will be “orphaned” and no longer sync.

How does your proposition help with this?

What do you mean by “not that thought through”?

POV: You use Windows

The ideas aren’t bad, but they need to be broken down into atoms to build a solid foundation for such a rule base.

• What is the motivation behind limiting member counts? Right now this would indiscriminately punish anyone with an existing userbase looking to open up to ActivityPub. Are there alternative rules that would tackle your motivation better?
• What constitutes an ad? Community is horribly split on this. There’s the obvious banner ad, but there’s also instance sponsors or users simply proclaiming how overly happy they’ve been with a certain product. People are calling each other sheeps and bought shills left and right. Go to a tech community, advocate for a browser that isn’t a derivative of Firefox and you’ll see what I mean.
• As for altering the protocol, again: What are your motivations for this, and could another rule tackle them better?

Before we establish any rules, it might be best to establish a communally agreed set of motivations and goals for the fediverse first.

Ah, must have gotten those mixed up then, my bad

How would these rules be enforced in the first place?

I don’t know if you know this, but Lemmy is also using an altered version of ActivityPub to federate things like downvotes.

Your rules are flawed.

And how often has that been the case so far?

As opposed to everything being exclusive to one platform, like you seem to prefer???

People like you are the reason they don’t use Linux.

Keep going like that and you’ll see what the real reason is.

Standard Notes is decent. Very rough around the edges, but it does what it’s told.

It’s simple. The people using Evernote didn’t care about being locked in.

I think you misunderstood me. I’m saying that whenever someone finds out about Lemmy, it’s because they’ve already sworn off Facebook, Reddit and other big platforms.

Do you think such a person will go back to a Facebook-owned platform just because it happens to federate?

No need to be a psychic if you can parse basic terms of service. At least I hope for your sake you’re capable of doing that.

Anything to defend your precious corpo, huh

And that’s how we know you’re out of points to make. Must suck if that’s the only comeback you have against people who aren’t defending anyone.

People who would register on normal instances or threads would only use Threads because of being lazy and then be lazy after Meta pulls out.

Isn’t this already the case? I find it unlikely for someone to find Lemmy without having developed a dislike for platforms owned by big corpos.

Once again, you chose the wrong platform with Steam. Other stores have been around at that time too.

I suppose I will have to repeat this for you a couple more times.