@sun@hakui It looks like the outgoing create activities with unlisted scope from SPW doesn't include the public namespace in the CC field, effectively making them private posts. The object data for such posts in my database does have the public namespace in CC, but the corresponding activity does not.
@hakui Also verified this behavior on lain.com and tuusin.misono-ya.info, unlisted posts from SPW are not visible there, but unlisted posts from other instances are. So, this is definitely an issue with SPW. The object data for it does include the 'https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public' in the cc field, so I'm not sure what the issue is. CC @sun
@wakarimasen@deadheat@lss@s@romin I think I've only had this issue with SPW, I can see unlisted posts of non-following users from other instances, but not from SPW.
@deadheat@lss@r@s@romin Since when does unlisted posting prevent users not involved in the conversation from seeing posts? Isn't that the point of the followers-only scope?
@sun@hakui I noticed the exact same behavior with @lanodan 's account, none of the unlisted posts are visible to me. So, it's not just SPW. I've been noticing it since a few months, but it wasn't so important, so I did not bother looking into until now. And just to be clear, this doesn't seem to be related to my instance. Unlisted posts from SPW don't show up on lain.com (and some other instances I tried) while being logged out either.
@sun@hakui@lanodan The last unlisted post from wakarimasen that I can see from my instance with either a non-following account or while being logged out is from early August.
@sun Apparently, even my instance is affected by this bug since I updated from 2.6.3 to 2.8.0. So, this has nothing to do with SPW. In fact, feld-san already created this issue on Pleroma GitLab mentioning the exact same behavior: https://git.pleroma.social/pleroma/pleroma/-/issues/3323 @feld This doesn't seem to be the general Pleroma behavior, 2.6.3 included the correct value in the CC field for activities. Akkoma doesn't have this issue either. So this is probably a bug introduced after the 2.6.3 release. There's been some changes related to the handling of the CC field and some refactoring in the publisher.ex file, but I couldn't find the exact change/commit that could've caused it.
@r@sun Thanks for the reminder on this. I made those notes while chasing other butterflies and never revisited it. It was very weird and I wasn't sure if it was legit