The best I ever had was a 6% full match, and the company contributed another 3% that I didn’t have to match. The result was company contributing 9% and me contributing 3%. So I agree with other comments saying you should probably be contributing about 15% total. That extra 3% doesn’t have to be in the same account though, you could open your own if you get better investment options with lower fees.
12% contribution that you don’t have to match is amazing and just make sure you’re fully vested before you take a new job. Sometimes there is a rule that those contributions are not truly yours until you’ve been at the company for a number of year.
The best I ever had was a 6% full match, and the company contributed another 3% that I didn’t have to match. The result was company contributing 9% and me contributing 3%. So I agree with other comments saying you should probably be contributing about 15% total. That extra 3% doesn’t have to be in the same account though, you could open your own if you get better investment options with lower fees.
12% contribution that you don’t have to match is amazing and just make sure you’re fully vested before you take a new job. Sometimes there is a rule that those contributions are not truly yours until you’ve been at the company for a number of year.
The big advantage of putting your additional contributions into the 401(k) is that it reduces your taxable income. The big disadvantage is that the money is locked away for decades; that cash is no longer available to make big purchases like a car, honeymoon trip, etc. There are some exceptions, but be careful that you don’t get hit with penalties.
Personally, if I were in your situation, I would open a no-fee brokerage account and put you additional retirement money into an index fund that tracks the S&P 500 or NASDAQ. If you need the money before you turn 66 then it will be readily available.
If you pay the same effective tax rate now vs retirement, Roth and tax-deferred are equivalent. The benefit of Roth is that it gives you flexibility in retirement, so you can choose how much taxes you pay in retirement instead of whatever you happen to withdraw from your tax-deferred accounts.
So a Roth contribution isn’t an automatic slam-dunk, it really depends on OP’s tax bracket now vs retirement. If OP is in the 12% or lower tax bracket, I highly recommend a Roth contribution, but if they’re above it, I recommend taking the deduction. I’m a little below the top of the 12% bracket, so I actually convert my old pre-tax accounts to Roth up to the top of the 12% bracket since that’s a pretty good tax rate to lock in.
taxes - 401k contributions defer taxes (or prepay for a Roth account), and there’s only so much tax-advantaged space available
investment options - 401k plans have limited fund selection, but many are good enough
If you’re planning to invest 5% regardless, choose the account that gives you the best tax advantages that matches your investment plan. For most, that’ll be the 401k in an S&P 500 or total US stock market fund. If the fees aren’t too bad, I’d absolutely go with the 401k.
If you’re in the 12% or below bracket, I recommend Roth if it’s available. If you’re above, deferring taxes is probably the better plan. If your funds are super expensive (say, >0.5% fees for an index fund), you might be better off in a taxable account.
As others have mentioned, you can invest in the stock market within your 401k, though your options can sometimes be limited or saddled with high fees depending on what broker the 401k is through.
If yours is through a shitty broker then you might be better served by opening an individual retirement account (IRA), likely a Roth IRA given the limited info you’ve shared. You can open one with a broker of your choice, so go with one of the better ones like vanguard or fidelity. Using tax advantaged retirement accounts will always beat saving your retirement money in a non-tax advantaged one, all else being equal.
I would put it all in VTI or VTSAX and read all I can about Financial Independence (FI). FI is great as a lot of the writing is intended to be accessible. Until you are more knowledgeable, then a broad index fund like VTI is great.
If you won’t miss the 5%, then contribute it. There are two contribution limits for 401Ks, one for money you put in and another that includes that amount your employer puts in.
I would aim to save as much as you can when it does not hurt. Some in 401K, some in a bank account, and other in a brokerage. 6 month emergency fund and all that. 50% or more saved each month will be great for your future. I have run at 50% 401K contribution.
If there’s an option for the company contributions to be Roth I’d make sure to do that. Roth is a “suffer now, collect later” type of thing. You pay taxes now, and NOT during retirement (good because you’re young, likely in a lower tax bracket than you’ll be in during retirement, etc.). Even the earnings are tax free in retirement.
Anything extra you put in should also be Roth. There are IRS maximums for personal contributions, and a higher maximum for combined personal/company contributions. At your salary you likely will not encounter these maximums unless you are saving $1,875/month (which would make you hit the maximum in December) in addition to company contributions.
To 401k or not to 401k – I say 401k. With Roth you pay now, not later. With traditional you don’t pay now, but pay later. Outside of 401k you pay taxes now AND later (on the earnings).
General retirement advice is to contribute 15% total to your retirement account. Since your employer adds 12%, you should contribute a minimum of 3%.
As for your coworkers advice, it may or may not be valid. Contributing to your 401k or a taxable account, both allow you to invest your money. The 401k comes along with tax advantages. Assuming you are making Traditional contributions, then you are saving taxes at the marginal tax bracket (potentially 22 or 24%). If you contribute enough to drop your MAGI to the 12% bracket, then the tax benefit is much less. You can still contribute to Roth, which means you can withdraw that money tax free in the future but you have to pay taxes on it now.
Another thing to consider is the fees in your 401k. Since you are limited to the options provided, sometimes fees are quite high. If you don’t have any options that cost less than 1%, you likely are better off investing your money elsewhere.
Finally, you get into the really personal part of personal finance. What are your goals? Do you have short/medium term goals that you would prefer to save this money for? For instance, if you want to save up for a down payment for a house in the future, putting that money in a 401k is a bad choice. Do you have a comfortable emergency fund to pay for unexpected expenses? Do you have high interest debt to pay off?
A good resource is this flowchart from r/personal finance: imgur.com/u0ocDRI
If you’re not particularly financially savvy, you should always put 10% into retirement in some sort of cheap index or target date fund.
Definitely do not fuck with individual stocks or god forbid, crypto, unless you are sure you know what you’re doing and prepared to lose 100% of your investment.
It does look bad and I plan to replace it regardless. I’m more so wondering if it needs replaced now. Wire is expensive and replacing this will be pretty extensive as I would need to tear out horse hair plaster to unstaple it from the studs. I’m not 100% on if it’s stapled or not but it’s tough to move and the other wires I replaced were stapled down so we had to tear open the plaster and run them that way. This would be going from 2nd story to basement through kitchen behind the sink so it’s not a quick job. If it needs replaced now I’m gonna need to cancel the whole weekend
I think old style wiring had bare neutral in those 240 wires. It is the path back and shares a ground connection in the panel. I don’t know the safery of insulated neutral vs non insulated, but I have seen panels with uninsulated neutrals. And The ground bar on modern equipment is also attached to neutral bar. I don’t have enough electeical theory knowledge to explain why / how it is that way though
The insulation protects the stuff outside the wire from catching fire. The wires get hot while carrying a load. Neutrals always carry a load once the hot is powered on. Grounds only carry when something goes wrong such as a power surge. They carry excess electricity the neutral can’t handle and usually significantly less so they don’t get as hot. There’s no reason not to insulate a ground, and it arguably is safer, but the amount safer is noticeably less considering the extra cost. For a ground to get hot enough to catch something on fire several other safety measures would need to fail. In that regard it’s not necessary.
Yeah I think in the old wire scenario the two live wires were insulated and bare neutral sandwiched in them with an outercasing could have been their compromise on insulating all of them. But if you use 240 the neutral is not used unless it is wired as a 3 phase circuit. But what i meant by not understanding electrically theory is why bare ground and neutral join at the panel. i.e. purpose of a ground wire if you already had something reaching ground via the neutral connection in the panel to the ground rod or piping.
Snaking wire without a guide for that distance is extremely tough. The normal way to swap out wire would be to tie the new wire to the end of the old and the pull the other end of the old. Since you can’t pull the old (it’s stapled and secured) you can’t pull the new through behind it.
I’m not an electrician, please consult with one if you’re unsure.
I think Shadow is right on both counts.
The wire is very old. Personally, I would rip it out, but that is a risk assessment you have to make.
A 240V circuit, in North America, gets there by having two hot wires one on each of the 120V circuts from the transformer in the street. So no neutral wire is needed to complete the circuit. If you want to think about electricity “flowing” it flows from one pole to the other (instead of to the neutral in a 120V circuit). The unshielded wire is your ground.
They are right. I was wrong. But the wire is getting replaced regardless. My step dad does a good bit of electrical work and said he doesn’t trust an aluminum ground on a 240v outlet
To your edit, it should be 2 hots and a neutral is my understanding. Hots deliver electric and neutrals complete the circuit back to the back. In newer wiring the 4th is the ground but a 240v 3 wire has no ground. However, if it is a neutral it should be sheathed and individually insulated.
That being said, I’m not an electrician and most of this is just what I’ve learned from replacing outlets and rerunning 120v wire in this house. If an electrician wants to tell me I’m wrong I’m all ears
The two hots give you 240 across them, but in North america an appliance may run 120 for standard control functions and 240 for heating functions, so in thise cases you need a neutral to provide a 120 pathway. you will see 240 stove appliance plugs have 4 prongs. 2 hot, 1 neutral and a ground. That wiring looks like a time before grounds were used.
If you’re in North America, which I assume you are based on the 120v wires, then your assumption about 240v power is a bit off. Both wires can be a hot (120v) wire, 180° out of phase from each other, so they add to 240v. In this case, a neutral wire isn’t necessary to carry the current back, the other hot wire does that. A neutral wire may be used, but then there would be 4 wires.
The ground wire and the neutral wire actually connect to each other in the panel, but it’s not safe to use a ground wire in place of a neutral, so definitely don’t wire it to the neutral on the outlet.
If you are unsure of what’s going on with this set of wires, you should really call an electrician to help. Wiring a standard 120v outlet is something a homeowner can do, but identifying an old 240v cable on a dubious circuit is definitely something a qualified electrician should do.
So, I have a problem with electricians. I’m running out of them lol. I’ve had 4 out already for other projects and I get quotes and in 2 cases even paid the first payment but no one actually shows up to do the work. So I have just been doing it myself.
That’s said, my step dad does a lot of electrical work so I do have a bit of help even if he’s not a full on electrician. He’s has tons of tools for this type of work and makes most identification pretty easy. He took a Quick Look at the picture and he said it needs replaced based on the fact that it has an aluminum ground so I am just going to run all new wire. At least I know now that it will be the right wire
Always! I’ve been doing a lot of work but I still don’t mess with safety. Obviously the main will be shut off and I won’t be doing the work while home alone in case something does happen. But since it is 1 breaker, 1 wire, and 1 outlet all being replaced it does seem to be a pretty straight forward replacement
Yeah, my first thought was to come into this thread and answer “I’ve identified it as the kind you replace”
Look at the wires in those pairs, they look like they’re falling apart from each other. Do you really want to risk an area in the wall where one of those wires being thin/having strands broken which is going to cause it to heat up inside your wall?
This has fire hazard written all over it. Just replace the wire and stop trying to take the easy way out. You’ll thank yourself later when you still have a house to go home to.
Hmm, that seems like not such a good look from Ernest. According to google translate:
I know, honestly it was on purpose. I noticed that forks sync changes immediately with /kbin. I wanted to check how they deal with this much-announced community-based qualitative code review. Answer: they can't cope. Quite an obvious bug was accepted in PR and domerged into the main branch :P It now works properly on the rifle ;)
Hopefully everyone can play nice and work together productively.
seems like you are saying ernest put thru an intentionally malicious PR to see what would happen? And what happened was exactly what is described? I mean, ya, thats what people will do.
It wasn't entirely intentional, it was actually my mistake. But I held off on pushing the hotfix for a while. It was a development branch, so these kinds of bugs were permissible - in this case, it just changed the order of related posts, nothing serious. It was quite easy to spot and fix. Slow and cautious acceptance of pull requests, something I spent a lot of time on, was the main accusation from the creators of forks. Hastily accepting them was a problem for me. I personally considered a consensus similar to that, but now I see it doesn't make sense. Someone needs to take responsibility. Personally, I believe that forks are the best thing that could have happened to the project.
It is good to really see your true nature now. I'm also think the fork is the best thing that could have happened for the community. It's a pity that you never started a conversation, but instead you still try to do mean things like this.
@melroy I don't think you can really be upset about anyone putting through bad code. According to the philosophy as I understand it, bad code (intentionally so or otherwise) is a useful contribution and you are basically soliciting it. You supposedly have some way other than code review to ensure nothing harmful gets through and it has to do with the reputation of the contributor. Since you already knew @ernest and clearly have a bad opinion of him, how did it happen?
I did not and could not review the PRs themselves. So I am just going on the information as presented here. Sounds like @ernest put through some code (either into kbin or mbin not clear on that) which he knew was not 100% highest quality but which error was not critical or devastating. And that it could easily be found and fixed. Partially he did this to learn more about this governance model. A model which has apparently been developed in direct opposition to his own. Is it approximately accurate?
If so, sounds a bit mischievous at the worst.
I really can't recommend Tyranny of Structurelessness highly enough.
Well I don't have a bad opinion about him (those are your assumptions), we just didn't agree on how a community project would/can work.
If however he did introduce intentionally a bug in kbin, just because of Mbin that's downright childish. The Mbin community does try to test all the incoming PRs (not just kbin sync PRs) on various instances apart from unit-tests, etc. We just do not want to depend on a single maintainer, hence a different way of working in the project.
He saying Mbin can't handle the kbin changes that is just not true (Odpowiedź: nie radzą sobie), at least we try to keep in sync (eg. for API comparability for upcoming mobile clients). But I'll leave it this, I'm not going to waste any more energy. I hope you understand.
Oh c'mon, don't be mad. It's just a wrong sorting of posts, it's in an edge case, and seriously it wasn't intentional. I just wanted to check how such management looks in practice, how many merge accepts are needed, etc. I didn't mean to do anything wrong that could cause harm. I even push the same code to my instance to facilitate your tests ;)
But you're right - that's just my nature. I approach PR with very limited trust, whether they're mine or from others.
I know your approach on PRs. Hence the main reason of the fork. The community does believe in their people and the good in mankind. Only 1 approval is required from another maintainer for now. We are using C4 way of working.
I assure you that I didn't intentionally push incorrect code into the repository. These were my first lines of code in a really long time. I simply got involved in other things that I wanted to finish first, and I noticed the edge case in the meantime, but it wasn't a priority. I saw that you were syncing and I was hoping to benefit a bit from it once you fixed it. I didn't expect the review to happen so quickly. By the way, I was genuinely curious about how this project management method works because, you know, I've always avoided such an approach. Merloy, you know how much I owe you, and I appreciate what you've done for the project, as well as the other Mbin contributors. Our overall visions haven't always been the same, and I think it's great that kbin has been forked. You see for yourself how my work looks until the release - there are many things I'll be refining over time. That's why I've put a hold on all other PRs, and now I want to focus on this.
lol this whole conversation is a microcosm of the open source community. I agree with ernest that forks are great and would add that they show that the open source system is working as intended.
You are right. But was the whole debacle that lead to this fork being made worth it? Wouldn't it have been much better if Ernest had just sorted out all himself and we'd all be working on the same project together now instead of introducing mistakes into forks too see what happens? What a complete waste of time, especially under the current circumstances.
In hindsight maybe we should have responded by saying we merged your mistake intentionally to see how you'd respond.
i am not being serious of course, as that's not our community's nature. Even though it's allowed to gather proof, we (I am quite sure I can speak on behalf of the community here) would never intentionally introduce bad code into software which is being actively used.
Ernest, you have seen me before, pleading for you to change your ways, on all fronts. This, sadly, degrades the faith I have in your project being suitable for being used in production, from a pragmatic point of view. Kbin may be reliable, but you are not.
Ernest said he didn't introduce bad code on purpose:
I assure you that I didn't intentionally push incorrect code into the repository. These were my first lines of code in a really long time. I simply got involved in other things that I wanted to finish first, and I noticed the edge case in the meantime, but it wasn't a priority.
Ernest has said many things in the past and many times has not lived up to his promises. So I doubt this words now. Also he's already contradicted himself on this matter.
Yeah, that's true. Real-life stuff was kinda more important for me at the moment than managing the project.
For me, it's straightforward: I pushed some dev code that wasn't even a complete feature, and it got approved in your pull request. That's why I was advocating for everyone to only merged their own PRs in the /kbin repository – so that each person could take responsibility for their own work. I won't go on about this any further.
Real-life stuff was kinda more important for me at the moment than managing the project.
As it should be, always, for everybody, you won't ever hear me judge you on that, so please don't try to make me look bad by implicitly suggesting I am.
What you failed to do however is delegate, even temporarily, your responsibilities to people you trust. Instead you left people who trusted you dangling, only sporadically feeding them promises you would never fulfill. It seems keeping them on a leash was kinda more important to you than securing the future of kbin.
I won't go on about this any further.
I hope I'll never have to mention this again, so you'll never have to. Which would imply that you'll have come to terms and lived up to your promises, both recent ones and from the past.
Yes, I say this fully aware - there are many things that I have failed at. Much of what I said, I failed to achieve. However, I never wanted to keep people on a leash; I am more of a person who prefers to stay on the sidelines and engage in what brings me the greatest pleasure - coding, just like any other contributor.
Believe me, I tried to delegate tasks, had many private conversations and discussions. Perhaps it wasn't visible from the outside. However, in that mental state, the last thing I wanted to do was resolve conflicts among adults, and it all started to boil down to that. As @BaldProphet mentioned - "microcosm of the open-source community."
Moreover, there were too many different visions of the project, ignoring requests, etc. That's precisely why I decided to temporarily halt development, to secure the future of kbin. It was my decision, and as I mentioned, forking turned out to be the best thing that could happen. As you can see, the differences are not that significant, but it will be easier for all of us - especially since we can always draw inspiration from each other, and I don't think anyone has a problem with that.
However, I still maintain contact with many people, and sometimes they mention to me the attitude of certain individuals on mbin's Matrix - it is at least puzzling. In any case, I want to stay away from that and focus on my work with contributors who understand and prefer my approach.
Believe me, I tried to delegate tasks, had many private conversations and discussions. Perhaps it wasn't visible from the outside
I am sorry but I'm having a hard time believing you when you say that you were seriously trying to delegate, as not a single soul ever said anything which would remotely confirm this. I believe you had conversations, but they ultimately didn't result in anything in this context.
However, in that mental state, the last thing I wanted to do was resolve conflicts among adults
I am not sure how to interpret this as there were no conflicts that I'm aware of that needed resolving during your absence, everybody was just waiting
I am more of a person who prefers to stay on the sidelines and engage in what brings me the greatest pleasure - coding, just like any other contributor.
There's nothing wrong with being like that, there are other people willing to do things like resolving issues. Like me. I realize I appeared out of nowhere. As a new instance owner it took a while for me to notice, but when the situation became clear to me I was ready to jump in and help, just like all the other people who had offered their help (before me).
You've basically just admitted that you were either incapable of or unwilling to engage in structural problem solving and management of the kbin project. That's fine, but you should have reached out and informed the community as soon as you became aware of this.
forking turned out to be the best thing that could happen
Yes, forking can have positive side effects and perhaps having two versions in development synchronously can merit more than one. This however was not the proper way to achieve this and using it as an excuse to justify your behavior and inaction is unjust.
However, it is not too late. You can still do the right thing by starting delegation now, by clearly assigning multiple people to all essential tasks, and giving multiple people complete control of kbin.social, so that, should a similar situation occur in the future, you and the community will confidently know that the project will not grind to a halt again.
Then seek a constructive dialog with the mbin community and we can make the project, in it's current for, work. Together.
If you feel uncomfortable with or are have trouble doing any of this, as you've clearly indicated you'd rather spend your time on coding, you are always welcome to ask me for advice.
You see, I don't know how I would act now in hindsight. You have to take into consideration that, at the peak, hundreds of people willing to help appeared out of nowhere, people I didn't know at all. By nature, I am rather distrustful and approach new relationships cautiously - I really need a lot of time to get to know another person well. It's true that after some time, a certain structure began to take shape, but not everything is always as it seems at first glance - especially when so many strong personalities converge in one place. Perhaps it was a mistake that instead of addressing many things publicly, I tried to solve them in private conversations.
And you're right, anyone who knows me a bit knows that I have trouble asking for help. Sometimes, I take too much on myself, which is not good in the long run. I'm working on it. But this time was something more. I promised to take care of things, and under normal circumstances, it would probably be easy for me because I have some experience in resolving such situations. But these were not normal circumstances. I realized this too late. I was just overwhelmed by real life. So many problems collapsed on me that I could never have anticipated. These were the worst months of my entire life. I don't want to write too much about it or make excuses, but at some point, even getting out of bed or eating something became difficult. When I tried to get back to the project, the thought of the backlog and how many people I let down made me feel sick. That's why I'm really glad to be where I am now. I can only apologize to you and try to fix some mistakes. I need to do it at my own pace. I want to clean up the mess, find my rhythm, and then engage in broader communication with people. I'm still recovering on my own.
What I did was indeed a bit malicious, but I believe it was the only way to achieve the intended effect. The fact that I really like you all should not mean that I will be uncritical of your work. I don't want you to fully trust everything that comes from me - only in this way can we fully utilize the potential we have in developing the fediverse. Frontend errors are just a trivial matter; they can be quickly found and fixed. However, the situation is completely different when it comes to backend mechanics. Seemingly minor errors when I was developing karab.in made me undo them for weeks. With larger instances, there may not be a second chance. This is not a centralized system, you have to consider others above all. That's why I am so sensitive to it and have so many doubts about making changes.
It's not that I want to make things difficult for you. I really care about mbin developing in the right direction. I am curious about what the future will bring. I would like kbin to remain rather ascetic, subtle, and something that you need to learn and understand a bit, rather than having everything handed to you on a platter. Mbin can be a different face, with more features, bolder, and I know that you have many great ideas for it. A simple example is the labels for marking mods/admins/ops that you are currently working on - kbin has it marked in a subtle way with a faint left border outline - you can do it differently, and that's great. As someone very wise once said, "If it's not diverse, it's not the fediverse."
@melroy I am sure that this is just the beginning of our shared adventure. I hope you won't hold a grudge against me for long ;) Guys, I deeply regret that we met at this stage of my life, but as I say, all I can do is try to fix my mistakes. Thanks for everything!
OP here. I was intending for this thread to be about the mbin fork and its governance, not about kbin. But I guess I kinda got answers to my questions (in so much as they exist) and then some.
I have no particular relationship/loyalty to ernest or to kbin. Like a lot of people, I just got here. I may or may not stick around.
I myself am a person who tends to become intensely excited by new projects. I can come in with lots of ideas and energy feeling like I will be comitted for a long time. But can then loose interest just as quickly. (It's taken a lot of times around the block to learn that.) So I understand why a maintainer of an open source project would have reticence to bring me, or someone like me, into their project in a position of authority without enough time (months -> years) to prove the comitment and to demonstrate competance. In fact I would regard it as poor judgement to just accept a ton of input like that. Just accepting whoever is offering energy can really lead to a lot of problems. I've been on both sides of those problems!
I started this thread to ask questions about mbin because I'd never seen an open source projects described like this. The mbin folks came in not really to provide answers to those questions, but to make insults on how they perceive ernest's personality and moral charecteristics. These based on vague but petty sounding grievances. None of these posts do much to reccomend the project to me. Sounds like waa waa waa babies. If the main grievance is they weren't allowed authority on kbin main, then I agree with that judgment based on the posts here.
Hopefully everyone simmers down. Maybe mbin can define itself in a less reactionary way in the weeks and months to come.
Well then. I don't know what happened here. I was asked about this situation so I linked here, to find, to my surprise, that my final comment is missing.
This is a month ago now and I don't want to continue the thread, but also do not like my comments going missing. So here is my response to the above
I understand your response, if I would stumble across this just new I'd respond the same.
This situation had been going on for months and this was in fact the first time ever that Ernest has properly responded to a message, anywhere, from anyone, since he went silent. So I took this opportunity to ask questions and get answers from him. A lot of people had already given up or lost interest, but I wanted to know for sure.
I was undecided up to now, but have always expressed my serious doubts about whether a person like him is suitable as a leader of a project like this. Not because of his personality, I am sure he's an awesome guy, but because of his lack of professionalism when things go wrong. Don't get me wrong, I felt very sorry for him all along, he was in a terrible position, no doubt about that and as I've said before I fully sympathize with him. But he should not have dragged the project and its community down with him. I'm glad he's climbing back up again and with him his loyal supporters.
What this entire roller-coaster ride, including this thread, has demonstrated to me over the past few months is, sadly, that should something go wrong again, it will very likely happen in the exact same way.
That for me removes all doubt; I conclude that he is not a suitable leader. I am sorry to say it but it's the way it is.
There is no grievance, but if this all sounds like waa waa babies to you I can fully understand. People were not pleased by the bad code being planted so that kind of set the tone and I understand I sounded like I was trying to make him sound bad. Everything I've said to and/or asked about him is based on reality, however.
It makes sense to me it came across as reactionary, but it's done now. A lot was cleared up for me, all doubt has been removed. Let's all move on with whichever version we prefer and make this great project better than ever
Despite the fork. I hope we can learn from each other indeed. That will only benefit both of us.
Although we merge into main it's not a release, we use GitHub/Docker tags to mark releases. And use semantic versioning if needed for minor and patch releases.
Instead you left people who trusted you dangling, only sporadically feeding them promises you would never fulfill.
Now, you see, this is the part that I as an uninvolved observer who's just now catching up on the happenings do not get. Promises that were never fullfilled?
How long has or hasn't this actually been an issue? Because from what I can see looking at the codeberg commits, it seems like development stalled for how long, like a month or so?
I totally get not wanting to be left hanging and having some answers and pathway for how contributions can happen. But as you also agree on, I also get real life being more important and getting in the way sometimes. And in that sense, being out of it for a month or so does not exactly seem like an earth-shattering amount, even if it's annoying when it happens to be the project lead and not much can happen.
I just can't help but feel like all of this has been pretty impatient and premature, which also makes it hard for me to really understand the point of the fork, even if I can relate to the basic rationale behind it. But then again, I have no knowledge of the direct going ons and communications between the contributors and the events that led to this. So there might be a lot I'm just not getting.
In case anyone stumbles across this, the problem was that the entity that manages .icu domains received an abuse report and suspended my domain.
This is strange because I only use the domain for personal experimentation and none of that is just for static websites. DNS records for mail are properly configured like all of my other domains.
I asked Namecheap what the reason was. They said none was provided and it may take some time to get a reply back upon requesting the info. I asked them to put in a request for the reason.
My guess is that I was just in a massive list of domains that someone started reporting. or maybe someone was trying to get my domain taken out so they could take it for themself.
Are you using services running on the OS, Docker or VMs?
With Docker you can set the Network and have some containers traffic egress on the vpn while others have no WAN or direct access. You can have a container join multiple networks to have the best of both worlds.
With VMs, you can set the network interface
With the OS, you might be able to set network interface for each service, but I don’t know how
I thought it's because the instance is missing, but I checked out your comment on fedia.io and it seems like everything is correct there.
Here on kbin.social it only displays @username without the instance afterwards, and the link itself isn't federated it seems. So kbin tries to resolve the name locally, fails, and just displays it in plaintext.
kbin.social
Active