I tend to take things literally, sorry about that.

Lemmy just displays the first image and ignores the rest.

In a future version maybe we can insert the images into the post body, or make Lemmy link to the PF version of the post.

No, sorry!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_exports_of_the_United_States

enjoy

BTW, the “weapons” category is the light green stuff in the bottom right.

https://join.piefed.social/2026/08/13/what-piefed-blocks-out-of-the-box-and-how-to-unblock-it/

For comments (not posts), the parent post has a count of the replies saved on it so it would be simple to compare that with the current number of comments the viewer is getting.

But without knowing which filter was causing it, that message would just be annoying.

Yes, good idea.

Depending on the settings of your instance, you might be able to upload videos directly into PieFed. I don’t know of any instances that allow that because of the storage problem but if you’re self-hosting your own then the only storage being used by local videos will be ones you put there yourself.

Also, PeerTube works. You can add any PeerTube channel as a community (e.g. https://piefed.social/c/piefed_announcements@peertube.wtf is the PieFed view of the original channel at https://peertube.wtf/c/piefed_announcements) and then cross-post from there into whichever Lemmy/PF community you want.

The main challenge is that we’d need to run the ‘get posts’ database query twice - once with no filters and once with the filters. These are big queries so they’re slow and hard to optimize. You really really don’t want to run them more than once per page load.

If you wanted a breakdown of which filter caused how many posts then you’d need to run one query per filter and compare it with the no-filter version to see the difference. So, about 6x. Impractical.

If all the filtering was done in the app logic (rather than on the DB server, using SQL) then it would be trivial to count up which filter did what, as the code looped through the posts. But I’m very sceptical about the performance potential of this, there’s a reason why we do as much filtering as possible on the DB… It’d be an interesting experiment to try.

Great idea :)

Excellent news.

No doubt the struggle is not over but this is something to celebrate anyway 😁

I’ve tried a couple of times but it seems pretty cursed.

The label doesn’t do anything until individuals opt in to filtering based on it.

We can’t leave it to the reposters to self-identify because

1. Lemmy does not have the functionality to do that and

2. reposters are deceptive and sneaky

deleted by creator

Individuals, yeah. Instance admins are going to need to designate reposters if they refuse to self-designate (and Lemmy doesn’t have functionality for them to do that, except as a bot) and then it’s up to individuals to decide whether they filter out reposters or not.

It’s manually-applied and reversible. I can’t reliably code an automatic reposter detection system because they’re all different. It’s going to have to be a human judgement.

Similar to labelling things as AI-generated or NSFW - being a reposter isn’t necessarily bad. It just means that people who don’t mind whether they see it can do so and those who don’t want to can avoid it, without the conflict that ensues when people with different needs and tastes are forced to share space.

Not yet, this functionality isn’t running on a live server.

They are using multiple accounts to try to mask it. I’m not sure but it seems like about 4 to 6 different accounts all run by the same guy.

It is a deluge. It is deceptive. No one opted in to it.

deleted by creator

Yes the screenshot is just the user settings. Admins are going to have to manually designate accounts as reposters because I haven’t even tried to make an automated detection. That would be very hard to get right.