::: spoiler References

• Type: Comment. Author: "@NotJustBikes". Publisher: [Type: Video. Title: "I installed Linux (so should you)". Author: "PewDiePie". Publisher: "YouTube". Published: 2025-04-26T21:29:28Z. URI: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVI_smLgTY0.]. Published: 2025-04-27 00:31:21Z. Accessed: 2025-04-27T05:44Z. URI: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVI_smLgTY0&lc=UgxdrNd-2ttDs897n014AaABAg.

I'm looking for inspiration for a custom Bash prompt^[1]^. I'd love to see yours! 😊 If possible, include both the prompt's PS1, and a screenshot/example of what it looks like.

Crossposts:

• https://sh.itjust.works/post/34840018

The Issue

Currently, it seems to be that the majority of instance defederations happen silently on SJW: As of writing this, SJW currently blocks federation with 86 instances ^[1]^, yet, from what I can tell ^[2]^, there has not been 86 announcements. For clarity, this is not intended to be construed as an accusation, pointed at the SJW admins, that this is some sort of intentional obfuscation; however, for the sake of transparency and understanding, I think it would be a good practice to open these practices up to the rest of the instance.

Proposal

I propose that whenever an instance is to be defederated, an open (ie unlocked) post should be published by the SJW admins (eg it could be published to !main@sh.itjust.works) detailing the name of the instance that is to be defederated, the rationale for why it is to be defederated (including evidence to support the rationale), and what steps would need to be taken by the respective instance's admins in order for that instance to be re-federated.

Benefits

• I think it would provide users with an opportunity to better understand the rationale and alignment SJW's admins.
• I think it helps keep the administrators (both locally and federated) publicly accountable.
• Having an open announcement for defederation could invite discussion on the topic. I think this discussion could offer enlightening insight.
• It will create a sort of searchable database for users to reference if they wish to know why a given instance is defederated.
• I think it could potentially reduce the administrative burden on the admins in that it serves as a sort of FAQ in place of users repetitively asking the admins why an instance was defederated.
• I think that It may provide a more targeted opportunity for the admins of the defederated instance to directly, and publicly, engage with the issue.

Drawbacks

• If there ends up being a large volume of defederations, this practice may end up becoming a sizeable burden for the SJW admins. One note on this is that it may be possible for some defederations to be grouped together, but this would have to be done carefully so as to not become obfuscative.

Additional Context

I think a potential counterargument could be: "If a user wishes to know more about why an instance is defederated, then they should just make a post asking about it, or they should dm the admins."; however, I think this may actually increase the workload on the admins if the question is posed frequently enough, furthermore, I fear that this sort of active approach on the part of the inquirer could have a sort of chilling effect: the topic of "instance defederation" is often a contentious one, and some may be hesitant to actively open themselves up to that sort of potential conflict in order to seek the desired information. This proposal would offer sanctuary for the inquisitive lurker.

nginx ("engine x") is an HTTP web server, reverse proxy, content cache, load balancer, TCP/UDP proxy server, and mail proxy server. […] [1]

I still pronounce it as "n-jinx" in my head.

I propose that the UI version be included alongside the backend version at the bottom of the page. For example, Lemmy.ml does this ^[1]^:

I think this information is useful to have for diagnostic purposes, reporting bugs, and for referencing documentation.