Selfhosted

60734 readers

193 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Detailed Rules Post

Be civil.
No spam.
Posts are to be related to self-hosting.
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.
Submission headline should match the article title.
No trolling.
Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.
AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
awesome-selfhosted software
awesome-sysadmin resources
Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

curbstickle@anarchist.nexus

curbstickle_lw@lemmy.world

310

[META] Are paid for, closed source projects, being advertised on this community, appropriate? (lemmy.world)

submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by breadsmasher@lemmy.world to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

149 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A number of brand new accounts have popped up shilling their paid for applications.

Is this within the rules? Is the community happy with this? Could mods clarify this in the rules?

Either allowing advertising, or banning it entirely.

my point is - there is a difference between an open source homegrown project that might be useful, vs closed source paid for projects from brand new accounts

some replies are misunderstanding, somehow.

I am against

brand new accounts who:

first post is a brand new project
project is closed source
project will cost money
is asking for free testing
the post is literally an advertisement

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

To be very clear. I am raising brand new accounts who have only ever interacted with this community to post their paid for product.

Not discussing the product in a wider conversation. Literal first post being “I made a product. Pay me for it”.

I dont think that should be allowed.

What if plex started posting here with their new paid for products?

[–] curbstickle@anarchist.nexus 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Personally? I have zero interest in that happening. As I've said before, I consider myself the janitor not the dictator.

It would be selfhosting related, of primary relevance as a lot of folks use it still despite.... everything plex has done in the past several years, and I would not be able to consider it a rule violation as of now.

There would need to be a new rule or a change to the existing.

[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Right ..

[–] curbstickle@anarchist.nexus 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

So lets get specific on rules, and break it down and turn your post into one:

Closed source commercial applications may not be posted from an account less than 7 days old or they will be removed.

Now what about mostly open but with a paywall on features (so partially closed)?

I'm happy to have a rule change here, I just think it needs to be a clear rule and community supported. If you'd like I can make it a pinned post to be voted/commented on.

[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I think the wording is reasonable. appreciate the effort!

[–] curbstickle@anarchist.nexus 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I tweaked things a bit to be more about percentage of comments/posts, which I think may be a better approach, in a newly posted sticky so we can memorialize the change. Its not implemented yet, and we can go back to an age-of-account approach, but I think % participation may make more sense.

[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

participation as a requirement is a good idea, actually providing first before trying to take