I personally think that a sign of a healthy technology platform is one where some people can make money from it, while the platform itself remains open. To use Linux as an example, it’s wonderful that it’s open source, and it’s great that Red Hat can be a profitable company based on Linux. It’s a good sign and it helps the Linux ecosystem thrive due to RH’s contributions.

For Lemmy there are plenty of free apps - no-one is being forced to use Sync. I’m happy to pay for something that provides some more polish to my Lemmy experience, and doesn’t require anything of anyone else.

Do you have a citation for this? It conflicts with what I know about GDPR.

Mostly GDPR encourages companies to delete personal data they were holding once they no longer have a legitimate use for it. There is a rule where you can demand your data be frozen if so that misuse cam be investigated and in that case you’d be right. But in general companies can and should delete personal data.

Have just bought Shadow Tactics and Tametsi based on this. I used to love Commandos (and even better - Desperados).

Is it actually a problem? One of them will naturally “win” - they’ll get the first chunk of people, then people will join that one because the people are there.

If we do get two vibrant competing communities it will be because they provide something different to each other in some way and then we probably don’t want to lump them together.

I think multi-lemmys would be useful but I don’t think we need them as a solution to the competing communities situation.

It is in your control, just not on a day to basis. You choose which instance your account is on and that is an important decision with consequences. People have signed up to lemmy.world because it’s easy but maybe their approach doesn’t match what you’re looking for.

It is hard at the moment because everything is in flux so the consequences of choices aren’t very clear. One thing to remember though - you don’t have to have just one account.