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
I think people should have to lurk and contribute a little before just advertising.
I don’t think we should promote closed-source apps on here at all, at least not in it’s own post. For exampke, many people here talk about Symfonium when mentioning their music client that they use to listen to their selfhosted music, and that app is not FOSS at all.
If an app is mostly open with some proprietary bits, then we can discuss. I’m perfectly fine with fully OSS apps that aren’t free, as the devs do deserve to be paid. As gnu.org states, Free means “Freedom” not “Free beer.” While I typically only use “free beer” type FOSS apps, I do occasionally donate to ones I love/use often, but we know that devs struggle to keep their projects afloat.
Ban all advertising for proprietary software.
Producing software is not free. Serious projects need to be able to commercialize, it can’t always be for passion and vibes. But it can be done tastefully, there is a difference between shilling slop and monetizing a serious project.
ban them
do not allow for-profit advertising, and do not allow spam
spam is already against rule 2
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Partial agreement. My personal stance - it’s a bit like porn. Hard to define but I know it when I see it.
- first post (ever, anywhere on Lemmy) is an adverting pitch for their brand new project - FAIL
- zero effort LLM generated blurb, with no human steering - FAIL
- the post is literally an advertisement and adds nothing else - FAIL
- the poster does a post and run - FAIL
- the post is bot-shaped - FAIL
- poster does not / cannot engage with community - FAIL
The whole thing about paid vs free etc…of course, I prefer FOSS and AGPL, but I don’t begrudge anyone trying to recoup costs or keep their source code to themselves. Someone else’s software licence shouldn’t be a purity test IMESHO
As for the whole AI / non-AI thing…too much of that comes off as performative. I think we can all spot slop, just like we can all spot email spam. In 2026, I assume you used AI to help…and you can assume (if I am interested in your project) I will use AI to spelunk your code base (initially) for borks, then dive particulars.
Ban 'em
LOVE the discussion folks, and @breadsmasher@lemmy.world you beat me to it, this has been bothering me all week.
I would love to see a consensus come out of this, maybe do a vote on wording/requirements? Idk, still working on figuring out the best approach.
Just a thanks for exactly the meta threads I hoped for.
As I’m doing things right now, closed source, paid, and the only thing posted is getting removed as spam. Unfortunately a common time seems to be about 7am GMT (side note - folks who are on around that time and can help with modding then, please reach out) and I’m not on for a good few hours at a minimum.
That said, I always read and check, sometimes deferring to read again and check the profile when I have more time later.
What I’m looking for at the moment is:
- Are people asking questions to see if this is crap being peddled for a profit? Is OP answering? (And thanks again to the folks who do follow up with great questions that dig into this right away)
- Does it read like a post from a person?
- How old is the account?
- How many other posts have they made? Where and what about?
That kind of stuff. Sometimes its super easy to spot (3 posts, same title, price and it being cloud only, etc), sometimes its not and takes more looking.
I think paid products can have a place here, despite them not being my kind of thing, but more as a discussion.
So if there is some degree of consensus on a good rule, I would suggest making a post about it so we can finalize, like I did for the rule 3 updates.
And if anyone has an idea on a useful option for a voting style solution for things like this, I’d love for a DM so I can check it out.
Not sure this actually addresses the issue.
- Ban brand new accounts from posting paid for closed source products where the clear goal is to make money
- Allow any posts for open source, free solutions where the developer is open and honest about their project
- Require an AI SLOP disclosure.
The rules need to be clarified. Again, whats stopping any big corporations shilling their garbage here?
Nothing before I started moderating, and as of now nothing either.
Again, I’m sharing what I’m doing to check and see if its blatant spam and nothing more. Anything else would mean a rule change, which is always open for discussion from the community, as I’ve mentioned.
I’ll point out #2 has also resulted in numerous reports, including for #3.
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?
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.
Right …
I would like some clarity on general apparent self-promotion of open source projects as well. As in, points 1-4 don’t apply and 5 depends on your definition of “advertisement”.
I’m bringing this up because I (once) previously attempted to share a project1 I maintain on here. I did take some effort to include some context and discussion points for selfhosters in order to make it more tailored and stay safe on Rule 3. It was quickly removed by mod. I tried reaching out to one of the mods to try to understand what was wrong. They were friendly and said they weren’t involved and would forward to the relevant people and since then I haven’t heard back. It would be very helpful to be able to get some feedback on why submission was removed so we can learn how future submission attempt could be improved (or abandoned).
1: FLOSS, no commercial or otherwise proprietary parts or relations, no slop or clank in the process
I’ve only more recently taken over here as a result of the previous mod being overzealous on Rule 3, I commented on a better approach, they rage quit and made me and another person mod. There were quite a few clearly relevant projects that got removed, and obviously yours fit in that territory. You can see the currently stickied post about rule 3 here in the community for reference.
So I agree that clarification needs to happen. Right now I’m applying the rules in the lightest way possible, trying to remove only spam right now because the rules are extremely generic and subjective.
My only ‘thing’ would be that I don’t consider this my community to hand down rules from on high, which is why I have encouraged people to make posts like this one so there can be community consensus.
How about a clarification to what Rule 1 actually means. If we are going to abide by the downvote system, and if we are to be cival, supportive, and not be insulting, and if we are all indeed adults, then rule 1should kick in somewhere I would assume.
- OP: Here’s my superduper fantasmgorical app. It’s so good it’ll make your dick hard.
- Potential User: Is it opensource? Is it vibe coded? is it a paid for product?
- OP: Yeah or no or explanation
- Potential User: Ok, that’s not my bag really, Thanks anyways.
Then exit the thread, and downvote if you must, but do it like a civil adult. What good does it do to denigrate and outright trounce another user if you just so happen to not agree with their product or how they do something? Hive mind leads to gatekeeping, and gatekeeping leads to reddit.
If it’s AI, it’s 2026 and AI isn’t going away. It is a safe assumption that at some point in the production chain, AI was used in some form or fashion. But it doesn’t give me clearance to rail on the OP and be downright insulting. Just exit the thread and hit the button. No need for the hatred and anger. Let the mod be the mod if need be. How much more civil and adult can that get? There have been a few outright adverts for paid for services. But again, those should fall under the downvote system and not the bullying system.
Does it read like a post from a person?
I think sometimes we forget that others do not natively speak the English language and use AI to help them communicate coherently much like Americans think that there is only America. Gosh I know I would would if I were addressing say a Korean forum.
How old is the account?
If you want to go that route then say so in the sidebar. Something to the effect of new users must participate in threads before unveiling their project. I’ve been to many forum that had that encoded into the forum itself where you had to participate in x number of posts before you could start your own post.
It’s not really that hard to be nice.
Thats not a single item list but a combo, as you know I’ve only recently taken over here, and as I’ve repeatedly said all rules are subject to change based on community input. Its only been about 2 weeks now (and a particularly busy week for me this past one) so I haven’t posted another yet as I couldn’t give it appropriate attention last week.
So let’s clarify the rules then, I’m all for it.
So let’s clarify the rules then, I’m all for it.
First, sorry to make your job harder. Second, my biggest issue is civility, supporting, and helping. Yes, I can, like everyone else, go low. I don’t like to, I’d much rather be cordial and helpful. I am inclusive, not exclusive, I’m all about agreeing to disagree and call it a day. No need to curb stomp anyone.
I don’t think getting the rules cleaned up makes things harder - if anything I think it makes things easier.
This is the selfhosted community. Not the Free, Open Source community.
I think you can infer the rules from the name here. The stuff you post must be related to software you can host on your own hardware. It need not be free, nor open source.
Now your point about spam from brand new accounts that are literally just ads on the other hand is valid.
I think new accounts that show up to shil their app should be banned. They’re not actively participating in the community, it’s just spam. There’s been a huge uptick recently.
This has gotten a ton of votes, and I’m in agreement that new accounts that have only posted about their paid app should be considered spam, and I would say a timed ban (maybe a week?) would be a good start.
Now what about open source vs paid? Devs who made something may just think “oh I should share it on selfhosted!” On their freshly made fediverse account. Does open source get the same treatment? I’d lean toward no, but some of these projects have a paid component as well - paid hosting, or a license upgrade, or whatever.
I think its fine that they want to make some money, and I’m personally more positive toward a hosted option than a paywall, but its a finer point to navigate than just “paid vs open”.
That said, I do see a problem with comments on some posts as well - a reply with “spam” and no report is not helpful. The comment itself isnt helpful. A downvote and report is.
So I think a clear and concise set of rules would be helpful, and maybe with a separate list for fully open source and no paid component, open with a paid component, and a fully closed (paid or not, because we all know where the profit comes from in this scenario).
I’d personally lean toward something like an account xx days old to be able to self-promote, and tags for each type of post.
Personally I’m fine with paid apps here, lots of people use tailscale for example. I think the larger issue is the drive-by spamming without contributing outside of their own promotion thread.
I like the comment elsewhere in this thread referencing a subreddit that requires X comments over Y days in the community first.
I think new accounts that show up to shil their app should be banned.
What if the new account user, who is working on a product that integrates with what the vast majority of selfhosters run, just found Lemmy? Lemmy selfhosted doesn’t exactly share the same popularity as say Reddit. It doesn’t just roll off the tongue. I had to vigorously try to find Lemmy before I got here.
That sounds like you’re describing someone who is only making a lemmy account because they see potential customers they want to advertise to.
That’s the exact reason I don’t want someone to make a lemmy account.
What if the new account user, who is working on a product that integrates with what the vast majority of selfhosters run, just found Lemmy?
This happens on Reddit, and basically my problem is that these users often don’t have enough experience to be able to actually give solutions. Reddit is full of people who think they have a good solution, dealing with comments of people explaining that what they are struggling with is actually a solved problem (or a skill issue). No one cares about your vibecoded slop that implements 1% of the features of an existing open source solution (they used to not be vibecoded but we still didn’t care). It being paid and proprietary is just even more annoying.
My idea of requirement to engage with the community is also about being able to ensure that the users are technically competent. If they are experienced, it will show up in the discussions we can see and review. For their benefit, if they lurk, then they can take a look at what is being used, and what problems actually exist, instead of making assumptions.
If they really believe their product is so good, they can spend a few weeks helping people with Linux questions and sharing their (non product related) insightful thoughts on Lemmy so I don’t dismiss them instantly when they finally advertise it.
If all they have to contribute is self promotion I think they should be banned.
“Lurk for a while before posting,” has been a standard rule of netiquette for at least the 30 years that I’ve been using the 'net.
I would tend to agree with that. Maybe OP didn’t think of that.
They did think about that, apparently you did not. Did you not see that they specifically said “brand new” accounts? Or are you talking about the most recent OP that posted an ad to beta test closed source software?
They should hang out a while first and not have only posts promoting their software, and not only have comments in those threads.
The lemmy attitude is very anti commercialization, and they don’t know any better. That doesn’t mean we should allow it.
They should hang out a while first and not have only posts promoting their software, and not only have comments in those threads.
I tend to agree.
The lemmy attitude is very anti commercialization
The lemmy attitude is like chaff in the wind.
You can start with timed bans, so they get the point
are they charging? is it open source?
They aren’t charging you. The OP/DEV in question is willing to give their product away. A product that integrates with your opensource *arr stack. All he wanted to know is, 'Would you be interested in beta testing it?"
I mean, there was recently a new user here who intro’d himself as a Windows selfhoster. He was pretty much welcomed with open arms, with a few snarky remarks, but welcomed. How much more closed source could you get than Microsoft Windows? What’s is the actual difference here?
Lmao, the OP you’re talking about literally said that “It’s a paid closed source app”. Why are you not mentioning that little tidbid?
“It’s a paid closed source app”. Why are you not mentioning that little tidbid?
I assumed everyone has a decent reading skills?
that is incredibly misleading.
its not someone asking advice about a closed source app. its someone shilling their own paid for product.
why are you ok with advertising for paid for products being shoved down your throat?
they arent “willing to give it away”. theyre willing to give it to testers for free labour to test their paid for app.
why are you ok with advertising for paid for products being shoved down your throat?
No one, not one living soul that has graced the halls of Lemmy selfhosted since I’ve been here has shoved anything down anyone’s throat. Are you not master of your own domain? Do you not possess self control? Additionally, I chart my own course. I don’t let hive mind tell me what I can and can’t selfhost or use in relation to my server.
they arent “willing to give it away”. theyre willing to give it to testers for free labour to test their paid for app.
So, to recap, they’re going to give their app, which is closed source but integrates with what most selfhosters host, to beta testers, who are interested, and in return, the beta testers get to keep the app for free. I see no free labor.
It was said when rule 3 was being discussed, that there are so few selfhosters out here, why gatekeep?
Yes, but all of your comments seem to miss the fact that this post is talking about paid software. Which is what the OP you’re talking about and defending did. You also said “they aren’t charging you”, which might be true for now, but they will make money off of beta tester’s free labor.
but they will make money off of beta tester’s free labor.
That’s exactly how beta testing works. I’ve mentioned, I do a lot of beta testing for BetaBound. I’m currently beta testing a rumba floor sweeper knock off. WHen I’m done, the company says ‘thank you’ by letting me keep the rather pricey product. Are they going to make money? Of course they will. That’s why they started business…to make money.
I think its funny that anyone who has closed source software thinks the best place to advertise it is in the federation. I love the fediverse but if it was the fact that it was gnu that I checked it out. I would totally not be here if it was closed source.
That’s kind of the defining feature of spam. Not thinking if it’s appropriate or good, just sending everywhere because some of it will generate clicks.
“Just delete it” or “scroll past” is not a useful response. Spam is infinite unless it’s blocked and/or punishable.
well that gets to the other aspect of here. its not a large population to begin with.
At it’s heart, this is what @selfhosted is meant for:
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.
I would say that members talking about paid/closed products they use (ex. “I connect to this via Tailscale” or “I use company ABC for hosted VPS”) to accomplish something is fine, but marketing or job boarding (ex. “Looking for QA on my commercial product”) is not.
I’m here for genuine interactions with other people. So I’m not a fan of ads from brand new accounts that will never engage with the community or enrich it.
if they are obviously bot or dedicated marketing accounts, then no I dont think they should be here.
However, I’m not 100% opposed to closed source/paid software being discussed here, but it should clearly marked as such, with a flair that people can filter out if they so choose.
If someone posts asking about whether there are any alternatives to a paid closed source program, that’s a totally valid conversation, and if it turns out there is no FOSS alternative, then we have to talk about paid closed alternatives, find the one that offers the best value and vet for trustworthiness.
The rules say nothing about selling a paid service, but maybe “no spam” should be updated with some clarity on self promotion, so perhaps you can self promote your FOSS service with the appropriate flair, but if you are selling a paid closed service it shouldn’t be allowed?
discussing a product is not the same as someone literally advertising their paid for product.
are you ok with advertising on this community?
if they are obviously bot or dedicated marketing accounts, then no I dont think they should be here.
I would like the rules to make clear what is acceptable.
self promotion of a FOSS project is acceptable in my opinion, as long as it is clearly titled as self promotion and isn’t done in a spamming way (such as carpet bombing multiple communities with bot posts). I’d also say that donation-seeking in those posts should be kept to the creators own web pages, not in the posts themselves too.
there is a pretty easy line to draw for what is blatant advertising and what is genuine discussion of a paid service. that’s not that hard to moderate, especially when accounts are new, and carpet bombing the same posts to multiple communities, that is clearly spam.
I don’t want this community, or any community on Lemmy for that matter, to become a lucrative platform for advertisers. If someone wants to promote their own product that they made, they should have some credibility as a real person beforehand. Not a brand-new account trying to sell a subscription to an app that’s essentially still in open beta.
I selfhost because I want to be in control of my data and own it. Closed software is the antithesis of that. They’re just bots trying to advertise their software.
I want to be in control of my data and own it. Closed software is the antithesis of that
So, please do share how your homelab has indexed the entire global internet, so you can use your 100% selfhosted, 100% open source search engine? I’m very interested. I’ve always wanted to run a search engine that is not tied to someone else’s.
I know your funning / snarking here but…do you know about YaCy?
https://github.com/yacy/yacy_search_server
I only learned about it myself a month or so ago and have been thinking about incorporating it into a project of mine (probably overkill - found a more elegant solution) but YaCy sounds like something you might like.
Also on this topic: I keep seeing meta-crawlers (Degoog, SearXNG, 4get etc) be promoted but…they aren’t exactly search engines. They’re aggregators that can (and do) get limited. Cool but not “hosting my own search engine” is that was the intent.
do you know about YaCy?
I do know YaCy. YaCy can use peers in the YaCy network for search results. I’ve never got consistently good results with YaCy tho. It’s been a while sing I experimented with YaCy. Perhaps it has gotten better and I should revisit. I do run Searxng, but that is an aggregator and I’m still using an external search engine, just cutting out all the telemetry and metrics. My point was, selfhosters do not live in a bubble. We, like everyone else, depend on services that a closed source, and out of our control. Sure, we try to be as private, secure and anonymous as possible, however at times you got to do a little dirt. Making money off an app or service seems to be an sticky wicket with some. Yet FOSS is full of apps that require a subscription to unlock more or different features.
- Buying an opensource app to unlock features. Dev team gets paid.
- Buying an app for your phone: Dev team gets paid.
I honestly don’t see much of a difference, other than one is definitely opensource, while the latter may not be, or is a combination of both. That seems to make the defining difference to some. Not all selfhosters align with the same creed.
That’s a petty troll response to a legitimate statement of what someone wants (which aligns with this group’s stated focus), where they aren’t claiming what they have done
It’s not trolling at all. You stated you got into self hosting because you wanted opensource and you want to retain all of your data. I’m asking you to share your homelab set up. A lot of people would be genuinely interested. The point being, all the gnashing of teeth is a duplicitous argument. If you truly do as you stated, then I’m wondering how you search a global internet from your homelab that indexes it all.
Removed by mod
There’s no respect in that statement and thats not appropriate here. Lets calm it down and keep it a discussion, not aggression and attacks.
That’s fair, thanks for cleaning up the mess and sorry for being part of it.
No worries, everyone gets caught up sometimes even me. Thats why its just a bunch of removals.
Removed by mod
Thanks for letting me and everyone else know you’re childish and stupid enough to be worth blocking.
Kind for kind.
reverts to personal attacks
good job friend. very grown up
Removed by mod
I’m not trolling at all
Sigh… As always, life must be balanced. You can’t go from one extreme to the other. It’s a spectrum. I self-host what I deem important in order to keep it under my control and not on a capitalist platform.
It’s an adventure, each month, you learn more and realize that you can host more services yourself.
I self-host what I deem important in order to keep it under my control and not on a capitalist platform.
And I applaud you for that. However, the fact remains, that not everyone selfhosts for the same reasons. I got into selfhosting because I wanted to be as private, as secure, and as anonymous as I could be. However, I do thoroughly enjoy learning how to do things on my server. At my age, it’s good to keep what’s left of my brain active. I genuinely like to tinker. I do also make concessions.
I looked at the rules, and I can’t find anything about closed source. I did find ‘without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don’t control.’ The reason this thread exists is because some people think closed source that integrates with selfhosted, opensource, is 100% out, and I find no evidence of such. It also states ‘Be civil: we’re here to support and learn from one another. Insults won’t be tolerated.’ Civility: Hey is this open source? Was it vibe coded? Ok no thanks bro.’ It sure isn’t the dog pile on the rabbit we see most of the time here when something AI, paid for, or closed source that integrates with opensource threads show up.
I agree that 100% asking selfhosters to outright buy something should be out. We’ve seen a few of these. But, again, the reason this thread was started was because a dev asked a bunch of selfhosters to beta test an app that integrates with what most here run, and in return for your efforts, he will let you keep the app if you so desire. So, you actually do retain control. You can pass. You can beta test. You can uninstall. Your choice.
Self-hosting is a community effort in which the whole community helps each other to self-host their data, including programming the services people use for this purpose. The problem with closed-source software is that we don’t know what’s happening behind the scenes, or if it’s indeed sending telemetry.
Even worse, if that service is ever no longer supported or updated, I’ll be left with data on my server that can’t be used to its full potential, and a service that won’t receive security updates.
Open-source software, on the other hand, is a community effort. If, for example, software is no longer updated or supported, it can easily be forked, and my data can be transferred to the new service.
