It's very nice, and thanks for including all instances. We are supposed to be a network of Lemmy instances working together. This site highlights that idea so thank you.
If I could offer an improvement idea, it would be to first show instances that are down in it's own group, and then every other instance exactly as it's done now, in alphabetical order.
Huh, this just made me realize that my instance isn't listed on join-lemmy anymore, that's odd (not popular enough I suppose). I guess that explains why I haven't had any registration requests in a while...
Ah, I see - do you know if that was changed at some point? I know when I originally setup my instance it was listed there, and it was just me on it. Everyone else came from join-lemmy as far as I know...
Well, regardless I've been meaning to try to get some personal friends aboard anyways 😅
Cloudflared services like ani.social are getting a “100%” available stat. That site may be up but it’s unavailable (denying availability) to something like ~1-3% of the population 100% of the time. So in principle it should never be able to achieve the 100% availability stat.
I understand it would be quite difficult to calculate an availability figure that accounts for access restrictions to marginalized groups, because apart from Cloudflare you would not have a practical way of knowing how firewalls are configured. But one thing you could (and should) do is mark the known walled gardens in some way. E.g. put a “🌩” next to Cloudflare sites and warn people that they are not open access sites.
The lestat.org availability listing is like a competition that actually gives a perception advantage to services that exclude people, thus rewarding them for compromising availability. I would also subtract off ~2% for all CF sites as a general rule simply because you know it’s not 100% available to everyone. They do not deserve that 100% trophy, nor is it accurate.
Hey, thanks for your feedback. I like your idea of labeling Cloudflared services, reporting is indeed a bit tricky for those especially if they use "Always online" to serve cached copies while the instance is down. I have some ideas on how to combat that, but labeling them also makes sense.
I can add tags against services - I have done this for ani.social as a proof of concept, I think it works but I welcome feedback. Sorting through the entire list is a bit daunting and will take me a while, but I'll get there.
Manually adjusting availability is a can of worms that I don't want to open, I'd rather we try to find other ways to level the playing field.
They ID and track every website that joins #Cloudflare. It’s a huge effort but those guys are on top of it. A script could check the list of domains against their list. There is also this service (from the same devs) which does some checks:
but caveat: if a non-CF domain (e.g. example.tld) has a CF host (e.g. somehost.example.tld), that tool will return YES for the whole domain.
Manually adjusting availability is a can of worms that I don’t want to open
I would suggest not bothering with any complex math, and simply do the calculation as you normally do but then if a site is Cloudflare cap whatever the calculated figure is to 98%. Probably most (if not all) CF sites would be 100% anyway, so they would just be reduced by 2%. Though it would need to be explained somewhere -- the beauty of which would be to help inform people that the CF walled garden is excluding people. Cloudflare’s harm perpetuates to a large extent because people are unaware that it’s an exclusive walled garden that marginalizes people.