Selfhosted

60320 readers

603 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.

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

302

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

submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by breadsmasher@lemmy.world to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

147 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

[–] Fmstrat@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

N of one, but:

Paid closed source = Advertisement, ban.
FOSS without free self hosting = Advertisement, ban.
FOSS with self-hosting but some self-hosted features are paid = Still an advertisement, but MAYBE acceptable if we are being lenient. I don't like it, personally.
FOSS with free self-hosting and paid hosted services = Good for them, play on.

Edit: @Shadow@lemmy.ca had a comment about Tailscale, it's a prime example of the last bullet.

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

There is a sticky up with the currently proposed rule.

Paid closed source or f/loss with a paywall requires active (non-advertising) participation.

f/loss that can be hosted and used fully without a paywall (even if they offer their own cloud option, or a donation subscription, whatever) is exempt.

[–] Fmstrat@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Oh that sounds spot on. Thanks.