CallumWells

The first rule of therapy club is that you talk about therapy club.

A true grammar Nazi would obviously know that it is a proper contraction. No true Scotsman and all that ;P

AFAIK you can have roles which have access to different parts of your server. Thus you can have that all newly joined accounts have a role where they only can see and interact with a channel for those waiting for acceptance. You can even make it “fill out a form in a thread” for why they want to join, and only after they’ve been accepted will they be given access to the rest of the server (or just some of it)

AFAIK you can have roles which have access to different parts of your server. Thus you can have that all newly joined accounts have a role where they only can see and interact with a channel for those waiting for acceptance. You can even make it "fill out a form in a thread" for why they want to join, and only after they've been accepted will they be given access to the rest of the server (or just some of it)

I'm not attacking you, I'm attacking your words.

And the reason I said you were obstinate were because you were. You refused to accept that it works since it doesn't do it in the way you want it to. And now you're rage-downvoting. You should probably take a few minutes off.

EDIT: No, you didn't state that it didn't work after seven minutes and multiple routs of attempting to get the link to resolve. I see that you have edited that in later, in one of the later comments. It worked on the reload for me. And no, it's not preventing input to improve a product, it's asking you to be less absolutist in your comments. "It doesn't work as well as it should" compared to your "it doesn't work". When it obviously does work, albeit could work better.

Edit: No ;P

Who said I can program?

EDIT: If I could do the work to make it work better I would.

EDIT:
obstinate
adjective
ob·​sti·​nate ˈäb-stə-nət : stubbornly adhering to an opinion, purpose, or course in spite of reason, arguments, or persuasion

Sound's like you're just being obstinate, then. It works, just not how you would prefer (well, I would also prefer that it didn't give an error screen like that, but that's besides the point). This is still early days of an open source project, and for that one should have a bit more understanding than for corporate products. A lot of other services also started out very unpolished and took time to get better.

The good thing is that you should be able to contribute and make it so that it doesn't do that since you wrote you were a software developer for your whole career.

EDIT: nice angry downvote, Cosmic Cleric...

Yeah, that would work as well. I'm sure there are times when there isn't a community that someone made such a link to, and at those times it should show an error screen, obviously.

So you're saying you did know that Lemmy has the thing where if you're the first one to ask to get community data from another instance the link will give you an error and you must click it again (or reload) to get the instanced version of that community for your instance, and then say that it doesn't work?

That doesn't sound to me like you knew how Lemmy works. I can agree that it should be more hands-off for the user and the server should silently just do the thing to get the instanced community before sending data back to the client, but that's a different argument.

That is how Lemmy works. Not my fault if you didn't know that.

Like Trainguyrom wrote, you're probably the first user on your instance trying to access it. Try the link again. It's the proper way to link to communities using Lemmy. Your link doesn't give people on other instances the easy option to subscribe to the community.

EDIT: Interestingly enough it looks like someone went through the first page of my profile and downvoted each comment of mine. Hmmm, how very strange ;P

He even called it "Alumium" before that, which I think is even better