needs more active users ☞ !stick@sh.itjust.works

Really like that one. Yeah there are more communities that i really like but they hardly have any activity:

!camping@sh.itjust.works
!pizza@lemmy.world
!desire_paths@sh.itjust.works
!raining@sh.itjust.works

Nature is often odd & that’s great:

!mycology@mander.xyz

Also !mushrooms@lemmy.world

!birding@slrpnk.net

I like !birding@lemmy.world way better, much healthier community.

Communities where there is an actual community interested in a topic and people are posting mostly OC.

I think !birding@lemmy.world is my favorite community. It is positive, mostly OC, somewhat active and about a topic i am also interested in.

Thank you, I guess I had a couple upvotes too but I was ratio’d pretty hard, for a small generally positive low traffic community I had like 20 down votes or something, people really did not like this. So I thought if it’s a real serious community about growing vegetables, it’s not for me, I don’t do that, I just do lighthearted wild flowers and bird stuff.

Awesome that you got these doves around and the owl! I have a kestrel cruising around my yard too. The pigeons make themselves all slim and starved looking when they hear it 😆 It’s tough out there for the birds, including the kestrel.

So that should be a “no” really :)

For me it’s a no, but looking at my subscribed communities, i don’t have all that many ml communities in there tbh.

The ones that i like best and that don’t have a better alternative elsewhere are !crows@lemmy.ml and !openstreetmap@lemmy.ml and i guess the ones about lemmy itself and jerboa.

The way they seem to be banning people is worrying to me, the ml users i generally don’t have a problem with, but i’m avoiding politics.

That is just the reality on lemmy for people interested in niche topics. If i see a community where different users posts something once a month and there are even replies, that is more appealing to me than scrolling through three pages of content posted by the same person.

If a billionaire buys LW tomorrow

lol that is a new one.

concerning behaviour from LW mods

Would you look at that, a mod of a big community for heated discussion said or did something that people took offence to. Surely must be the instance’s fault, would not happen anywhere else.

!movies@lemm.ee is more active than !movies@lemmy.world in monthly active users.

You are doing a good job there, also with advertising the community, but I’ll say again that the world community looks more healthy to me, it’s a variety of different users posting there, while the ee one consists half of emperors and your effort to try and force this, actually it is only three topics that have been created by non moderators on the first page.

That is a software problem, I thought you guys were all computer experts.

If world wasn’t so big, it would have probably not even been noticed, now it is hopefully getting fixed with the next update, if I understood that right.

Federation works waaay better than when the big reddit influx happened, that was kinda disappointing and I’m glad Lemmy will be prepared better for the next wave.

Lemmy.world has a bunch of memes and political screeching because that’s the kind of user its admins choose to encourage.

How are the admins encouraging these users specifically? I have not noticed this, but I have been blocking most politics and meme communities for a while.

!bikewrench@lemmy.world

Yeah I see that differently. To me these forced posts for the sake of posting something, that are all being created by the same people are not necessarily that appealing to me, they don’t give me the impression that there is an actual community interested in the topic, you know? It’s kinda obvious that it’s really more “pretend active”.

While the plantid one, it seems like there is a community there, they just don’t post much, because there just aren’t that many people on Lemmy that have plantid questions. The community actually has a purpose and direction, it is active if activated and it gives good answers.

Right, forgot about that. Sadly I feel that this is a little bit too strict for Lemmy niche topics. To me that community is at least healthy looking, it has regular posts created by different users, and all get replies by different users. But it is quite low traffic, sure.

!pizza@lemmy.world

Maybe !plantid@mander.xyz fits into this as well.

Going to give !balconygardening@slrpnk.net a shoutout I guess, even though those bastards hated my (shit)post about raising pigeons on my balcony, that made me delete the post and unsubscribe from the community, haha.

To 1: Where do you have the parking then, without the mandated parking minimum? On the street? Second row in the street? On the little piece of green that is there? On the sidewalk? In the bicycle lane? On the neighbours parking lot? Let’s assume the business wants to provide and pay for parking in good faith, with the minimal reasonable amount of parking for the demand: That should be the number of parking space you are looking at if your municipality sets a reasonable parking minimum! The municipality has no interested in letting developers build some crap that will not work or be an unbearable burden to the neighbourhood. These regulations also incorporate necessary bicycle parking, which i think may become a hotter issue where i live, because the demand is currently absolutely not there in the numbers that some municipalities require, miles away really. But if the municipality has the interest to push the means of transport in that direction, regulating these kinds of things is a way to do that.

To 2: I am not working with that assumption. I am working with the fact that people do have cars and do drive, not all of them, but it’s not a number to just brush under the carpet. If you have a reasonable minimum parking mandate all these alternatives you mention should play a role in what the number actually looks like. Let’s make a quick calculation how it would look like where i live for a business that has “ridiculous” minimum parking requirements (1 slot per 100 m² of storage space), as some other user here deemed. A storage space.

They have 30 employees and 10000 m² of storage space. The minimum car parking required is 1 slot per 100 m² of storage space. 100 parking slots, that is ridiculous! Oh wait, it is 1 slot per 100 m² or 1 slot per 3 employees. 10 parking slots, not that ridiculous anymore. Depending on how well the storage space is connected to public transit you can reduce the parking minimum up to 30%. Let’s say it is not very well connected, just a bus. You claim 10% off. 9 slots. Tell me this is not reasonable, if 78% of households here own at least one car. You can get more reductions if you build extra bicycle parking (bicycle parking would also already be at ten slots already btw), you can buy yourself out of the need to some degree, or have other kinds of ideas (but the municipality has to go along of course).

That would be a parking minimum calculation for a bland situation, where nothing special is going on, just some shitty public transit nearby, a place where you would build a storage space i guess. And my conservative guess would be that at least double the amount of employees will arrive by car, so the business gets to push half of their actual demand into the public space, for which you now pay for and get to look at when you stroll down the sidewalk.

The closer you get to something like “downtown”, the lower the base number for your calculations will become, because it will be more feasible for people to walk, cycle places, public transit is better too, the idea is to have reasonable regulation that tries to reflect (planned) reality.

If i build a housing complex with a minimum parking rate of, say 0.6 slots per appartment, the people who buy or rent late may end up not having any parking available in the complex. That’s how it goes, but there’d still be minimum parking regulation in place, even if there are no more slots available. That regulation should be reasonable, situational and try to reflect the actual or planned reality, is what one should demand from regulators. Regulating minimum parking requirements is not necessarily a bad thing and it is also being done all around Europe, even if people don’t know about it.

Yeah, no, as I read it, you do have some kind of parking minimum regulations, not just recommendations, developers are not free to do whatever they please.

Ok, well maybe this year we finally see a downturn for real, there were dips during covid as well, but in general there was still growth, and growth being expected. I would welcome it, that would be great!

But when a developer in my neighbourhood develops new housing, on a previously industrial barren area, they need to build parking space for their expected demand, because there is no space for cars left elsewhere, and people buying appartments usually do have (money for) cars. The fact that there is now a free parking lot wherever the people who move here moved away from, does not help the situation here.

I would guess that the rate right where i live would end up at around 0.6 slots per appartment (including appartments for families with 2-3 kids), as a regulatory requirement. To me this seems to be reasonable regulation, although it is most likely too low for the actual demand, at least if the appartments are being sold. Of course it will be underound parking in a dense area like this.