In my opinion, yes. I am a long-time fan of the book series and have enjoyed the first season of the show. There are differences, as there always are with adaptations and especially an adaptation of this scope. Just as with all adaptations with existing fandoms, some fans are bitter about it.

I think this may be related to this bug.

Thanks for sharing!

https://github.com/mastodon/mastodon/issues/11339

Favorites (likes, stars, whatever) don't Federated, so the only favorites that your instance shows are the ones it knows about, being the favorites that are local.

When I view that same post from my instance I also see 0 favorites. But when I view it on mastodon.social there are 366.

Kinda nice to have it confirmed I guess. I do think she fits the role physically, and I have a lot of faith in the show's casting. I look forward to meeting Lanfear on the show.

It's using the custom emoji on the user's instance, then just putting the :code: for the emoji in their display name. Like on my Mastodon account my display name is entered as hybrid havoc :1m: :rm:

:1m: and :rm: are custom emojis I have setup on the instance.

Yeah looks like a lot of single-user instances have seen a similar huge surge in user accounts. Here is a link to one of the discussions on the topic: https://lemm.ee/post/177673

Are you aware that your instance is currently home to nearly 20,000 users, while still only reporting just 2 posts? From the outside looking in your instance looks like the current home of a spam bot farm waiting to happen.

Most of those users seem to have joined in the past 2 days. https://fedidb.org/network/instance/lemmy.elest.io

Book Walker, Bramble, and Story of Seasons all look like they could be of interest to me.

Meta is launching their own ActivityPub service.

Who got together and decided what it was "supposed to be"? Why does the fedi.tips account consistently behave as though they are some authority?

Either it's an open protocol or it isn't. If instances want to immediately defederate, that is their right of course. But to my mind it sort of demonstrates that they don't believe in what they preach, and they don't believe that they can offer a more compelling social offering, even with direct access to Meta's user base.

Literally every repeated talking point I've seen around this is all rumor and conjecture. At the end of the day we don't actually know how this will play out until Meta's offering is launched and we see how they do business.

Also unclear where the "paid off" aspect comes from. The linked post doesn't say anything about anybody being paid.