Feral Thoughts
🧵 arguing that all responses to a new post (the original post of any thread) and responses to those responses should be routed to all the participants through the instance hosting the original poster (and that all responses should mandatorily inherit the privacy level of the original post, and also mandatorily inherit the “privacy group” of recipients set by the original post).
(continues)
silverpill
@feralthoughts You're describing Conversation Containers.
silverpill
@feralthoughts @osma Conversation Containers are used by Forte, Streams, Hubzilla and Mitra. There is a list of known implementations at the end of FEP-171b:
https://codeberg.org/fediverse/fep/src/branch/main/fep/171b/fep-171b.md#implementations
>I know about Hubzilla and (streams), but they are both based on Nomad/Zot protocol.
Hubzilla and Streams support Nomad and ActivityPub.
Forte is ActivityPub-only.
Feral Thoughts
I know about Hubzilla and (streams), but they are both based on Nomad/Zot protocol. I was asking about software based on ActivityPub. I guess then Forte is the only ActivityPub-based software to implement Conversation Containers and Nomadic Identity.
Osma A 🇫🇮🇺🇦
If Mike's pioneering work would be accepted by other developers (particularly Eugen), fedi would be in a much, much better shape. Alas...
@feralthoughts
Feral Thoughts
I was wondering if #Forte is the only #ActivityPub software to implement Conversation Containers and Nomadic Identity. Do you know of any others?
Osma A 🇫🇮🇺🇦
I'm not an expert on the subject, but..
https://hubzilla.org/page/info/timeline
https://wedistribute.org/2024/03/activitypub-nomadic-identity/
That is, to the best of my knowledge it's all Mike.
@feralthoughts
Feral Thoughts
I believe Mike Macgirvin’s ActivityPub-based #Forte behaves in the fashion I have described above. So it may be worth checking out.
(continues)
Feral Thoughts
In other words, a new post should be treated somewhat like a blog, and every response and response-to-a-response should be treated somewhat like comments under a blog.
(continues)
Feral Thoughts
I think this will also eliminate the need to tag the users one is responding to, for them to receive notifications. That will save many characters which can be used for actual post content.
(The need to tag in Mastodon-like platforms is a headache. If there are too many people participating in a conversation, then a whole lot of characters are lost in tags. In addition, one also has to think of hashtags. So very few characters are left for the actual post.)
(continues)
Feral Thoughts
So... say, user UA on instance A writes a new post. User UB on instance B replies. User UC on instance C replies to UB’s post. User UD replies to UC’s post. UD’s post should reach instances C and B though A (D -> A -> C and D -> A -> B). Same with all other replies.
This may also give the OP the authority to delete any subsequent post in that thread.
(continues)
Feral Thoughts
In addition, all of the subsequent posts, even posts that do not tag the OP, should be routed through the original poster’s instance.
(continues)
Feral Thoughts
Not only should every subsequent post in the thread inherit the original privacy level, but it should also inherit the “privacy group” of recipients set by the OP (followers-only, mentioned-people-only, etc.)
What happens if some reply post tags an outsider? What ought to happen?
Not sure, maybe tagging should be forbidden for follower-only posts? And replies should be forbidden from tagging anyone in mentioned-people-only posts?
(continues)
Feral Thoughts
So if the OP posts a follower-only post, all subsequent posts should be restricted to the followers of the OP, not the followers of the respondent.
(continues)
Feral Thoughts
Then there’s the issue of harassment of black users discussed in
https://union.place/@feralthoughts/115345717793512758
(continues)
Feral Thoughts
I have had this in mind for quite some time, but I think a reasonable solution to all of the above issues would be to make the original poster and the original post the authority over the entire thread. I am combining the points made by @jdp23 and @osma here, and trying to generalize.
(continues)
Feral Thoughts
This means a followers-only thread is going to be utterly broken, with each reply being visible only to a random subset of participants. And then it is common on the Fedi for people to randomly tag others, which will cause even more disorientation.
(continues)
Feral Thoughts
There were some fascinating points made in response to the thread
https://union.place/@feralthoughts/115345717793512758
I wrote yesterday.
Specifically, this post by @jdp23 https://neuromatch.social/@jdp23/115347779737594231
and this one by @osma https://mas.to/@osma/115348375715047778
(continues)
Feral Thoughts
My account is default public, and I am more of a lurker (because I am from the global south, and there’s no community for me here); so the peculiar dynamics that @jdp23 highlighted had never occurred to me—that the followers-only reply to a followers-only post will be visible only to the followers of the responding poster and NOT the followers of the OP.
(continues)
Feral Thoughts
All the points I am making in this thread were already made in various branches of
https://union.place/@feralthoughts/115345717793512758
but they are scattered all over the thread, so I am accumulating them here in one place.
(continues)
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.