I’ve been researching for the past week Threadiverse projects (Lemmy at first, then PieFed and now Mbin) with the goal of testing out their interoperability with the rest of the Fediverse.

Apologies in advance if this is the third post you see from me - this one is my first in Mbin.

I wonder if you have any insights regarding the differences between the 3 - advantages/disadvantages and opinions on your favorite project?

I’m also interested to see if Mbin manages to federate mentions (unlike Lemmy and PieFed who falls short). So for the purposes of this test, I’m mentioning:

  • my Mastodon account @_elena@mastodon.social
  • my Friendica account @elena@opensocial.space
  • and my Lemmy account @elena@lemmy.world to see if anything happens

Thanks and happy to be here!

  • kenkenken@fedia.io
    143·
    3 months ago

    Threadiverse? I didn’t hear this name, I think it can be confused with Meta’s threads.net. But I don’t like Lemmy, and don’t want the network to be named after it. For example we don’t call Fediverse as Mastodonverse.

    As for Mbin, UI looks good, a feature showing similar threads is useful. But it is quite new yet, many important options are missed in the preferences yet.

    • MeldrikA
      19·
      3 months ago

      Lemmyverse = a federation of Lemmy instances. Threadiverse = a federation of Lemmy, mbin instances etc. Fediverse = all the software that uses ActivityPub.

    • nutomic@lemmy.ml
      7·
      3 months ago

      The network is called Fediverse. I don’t see the need for a separate term, there also isn’t a “Tootiverse”.

    • Otter@lemmy.caEnglish
      7·
      3 months ago

      I’ve used the term “threadiverse” for a while and it’s been in use from before Meta threads was widely advertised, but I agree that it can be confusing now

      It would be nice to have a descriptor for the format. For example, Mastodon & Misskey are ‘Microblogging’ platforms. Lemmy, Mbin, Piefed, and Sublinks are _____ platforms.

    • Bezier@suppo.fi
      81·
      3 months ago

      I think the name has been there longer than threads(.)net. But yeah, at this point it’s too easy to confuse if one doesn’t know about it already.

      • ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io
        3·
        3 months ago

        Yes indeed… “threads” in the generic sense of the word pre-dates the web. And threadiverse is a few years older than “FB Threads™”. That’s what’s so despicable about Facebook hi-jacking the name. It’s also why I will not refer to them by Meta (another hi-jacking of a generic term with useful meaning that their ego-centric marketers fucked up)