Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Jenniferplusplus (jenniferplusplus@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 02-Aug-2024 01:52:02 JST Jenniferplusplus

   Once again, mastodon's affordances (and missing affordances) are framing everyone's imagination. There are other options than simply allow list vs deny list federation. Personally, the one I want to see is multiple named federations:

   Right now, there's just one federation, named public. There's absolutely no reason we can't have more than that.

   • Ryan Castellucci :nonbinary_flag: repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Paul Cantrell (inthehands@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 02-Aug-2024 01:52:01 JST Paul Cantrell

     in reply to

     @jenniferplusplus
     This is an interesting idea. And there’s many ways of partitioning or subsetting: named groups, pairwise mutual trust networks, opt-in published lists from trusted authorities….

   • Embed this notice
     Jenniferplusplus (jenniferplusplus@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 02-Aug-2024 01:54:37 JST Jenniferplusplus

     in reply to

     I like star trek metaphors for this.

     In Trek, you have the united federation of planets. You also have the klingon empire and the romulan star empire, and so on. Those would all be named federations. Servers could join one or more them. The users on those servers would get some extra visibility options on their posts. Depending on the rules of their server and their federations, they could post to the UFP, the klingon empire, both, or neither.

   • Embed this notice
     Jenniferplusplus (jenniferplusplus@hachyderm.io)'s status on Friday, 02-Aug-2024 05:28:28 JST Jenniferplusplus

     in reply to

     • Paul Cantrell

     @inthehands technical and administrative support networks. Imagine mastohost includes all their instances into a mastohost federation, and they all share media storage.

     So many possibilities