Code for people interested
app/admin/routes.py#L373 (removed since posting), app/cli.py#L1026
I commented it out, rebuild the Docker containers and it works now 👍
EDIT: People seem to misunderstand what it does. It prevents it from federating automatically when populating the community search, importing from another instance or from Lemmyverse. It’s not a full block, and you can still add it manually. Not only that, but it’s also already partially removed since I posted this.
This filter is not part of any specific instance, it’s hardcoded into PieFed’s code. That means it applies to every PieFed instance unless the instance admin explicitly patches the code to remove it.
As mentioned elsewhere, it’s just a convenience function - anytime after starting up the instance, the admins can always pull in those communities manually. Or change this part of the code beforehand. So it’s not a hard-coded “block”, just slightly less convenient for it to not automatically pull in those communities during the one-time initial setup for an instance.
But anyway you are right that this should not be a hard-coded list.
Edit: it’s also worth mentioning that the way that Lemmy does this is via a direct pull of communities from Lemmy.ml. What I am reacting to here is not so much to say that PieFed’s method is perfect, but that both suffer from flaws, and that PieFed’s is relatively benign, at least in comparison to Lemmy’s. Lemmy uses an extremely authoritarian approach whereby Lemmy.ml is the sole and invariant arbiter of what communities are allowed vs. not during that initial one-time setup, and there is no way to change that, whereas PieFed uses a list that the instance admin is capable of changing. On the spectrum of authoritarian control, PieFed’s level here is like a 1 out of 100, whereas Lemmy’s is… well, it’s still not much in this exact situation, but it’s definitely way more. Sorry for being confusing initially in the way I worded that.
I don’t host any so as I understand it:
The problem with PieFed is the initial filter list is not opt-in, but can be modified freely.
The problem with Lemmy is changes like those will be hardcoded.
The thing with PieFed… I don’t know if it’s in the setup guide and OP didn’t read it or if it must be pointed out in the guide.
Anyway, it should be opt-in, not opt-out.
But trying to frame it as if it was as terrible as lemmy… Lemmy defenders sure love the ragebait.
I presume that it was a simple misunderstanding, but in any case it has lead to some… interesting, and ultimately quite fruitful discussion, so there’s that to have enjoyed:-).
And it really shouldn’t have been hard-coded like that. A minor issue imho, and one not really a problem until now, but at least it’s already now well on its way to being resolved. In contrast, Lemmy’s own hard-coding of Lemmy.ml into the equivalent function I doubt will ever be changed, certainly not without strong reluctance (and likely along with public outcry, as before with the filter list).
One point: I would argue that opt-in vs. -out doesn’t fully apply here, as this automated convenience function will only ever be run once upon initial setup for an instance, after which the instance admin can add any communities they desire, manually (I’m not sure why OP phrased it then as needing to be “debugged”, that seems an odd term for such routine instance maintenance tasks that do not need any modification of any code at all, anywhere?). In short, it’s not actually a “block” at all, as the wording in the meme seems to me to strongly imply by using “federate”). The phrase “opt-out” usually referrs to something harsh but that isn’t all the way fully forced, but this issue of not pulling in (initially) of communities is so extremely gentle than on the spectrum it is adjacent to “opt-in” already? Still, ultimately you are probably correct, I am just not sure of the wording there, so wanted to help by offering those additional nuances.