Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 04:56:52 JST Feral Thoughts

   • silverpill

   @silverpill

   I am curious about #Mitra, so here are a few questions; hope you don’t mind.

   (continues)

   • Embed this notice
     silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 04:56:50 JST silverpill

     in reply to

     @feralthoughts No, this is not supported.

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 04:56:51 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill

     @silverpill

     Say, a Mitra user boosts (reposts) a post in some thread, or posts a reply in that thread. Does the user then get notified of all subsequent posts in that thread?

     Basically, is there some way for a Mitra user to “subscribe” to a public thread, or flag in some way that they would like to receive existing posts as well as get notified of all future posts in that thread/conversation?

     (continues)

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 04:56:52 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill

     @silverpill

     How does Mitra work in case of public conversations?

     Say, a Mitra user writes a new public post (OP of a thread). Do they get notified of all replies in the thread, including even those reply-to-reply posts that do not tag them?

     Can a respondent to the OP’s public post change the status of their reply post to followers-only or mentioned-users-only? If the OP is not a follower of that respondent, and is not tagged, will the reply be visible to the OP?

     (continues)

   • Embed this notice
     silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 05:06:21 JST silverpill

     in reply to

     @feralthoughts

     How does Mitra work in case of public conversations?

     Similar to how Mastodon and other micro-blogging platforms work. You're notified only when you're directly addressed (this is usually done by @mention).
     It doesn't currently use Conversation Containers for public conversations, but I think the way notifications work will be the same when we switch to containers

     Can a respondent to the OP’s public post change the status of their reply post to followers-only or mentioned-users-only?

     They can reply with narrower visibility. I think narrowing of the scope should be allowed, but not widening. Although, as far as I know, Streams/Forte allow neither.

     If the OP is not a follower of that respondent, and is not tagged, will the reply be visible to the OP?

     Currently it is not visible.

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 05:11:31 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill

     @silverpill

     Can Mitra instance admins subscribe to ActivityPub relays?

     (continues)

   • Embed this notice
     silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 05:11:31 JST silverpill

     in reply to

     @feralthoughts

     Hashtags: only if they are ActivityPub actors, e.g. https://relay.fedi.buzz/ hashtags
     Groups: yes
     Relays: yes, and regular users can subscribe too. Actually, there is no special admin interface for subscribing to relays, we just use regular accounts.

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 05:11:32 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill

     @silverpill

     Can a Mitra user follow hashtags and groups?

     (continues)

   • Embed this notice
     silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 05:28:23 JST silverpill

     in reply to

     @feralthoughts Yes, mirroring partially works, but nomadic accounts require a special command-line client:

     https://codeberg.org/silverpill/fep-ae97-client

     It's not possible to create a nomadic account from the web site.

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 05:28:24 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill

     @silverpill

     I read that Mitra experimentally supports nomadic identity. Does this feature make it possible to simultaneously have the same account on two or more Mitra instances, with new activity in any of those getting mirrored on the clone accounts?

     Basically, does nomadic identity in Mitra work in a fashion similar to that in Hubzilla?

   • Embed this notice
     silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 07:10:46 JST silverpill

     in reply to

     @feralthoughts Server admin must enable the experimental API first.
     All operations with a nomadic account require command-line client, regular interface can't be used. Cloning happens in background.

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 07:10:47 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill

     @silverpill

     Can a user without admin access do this?

     And once the CLI action is done, either by user or admin, can the user then use their account's web interface normally on either site, with no further command line interventions required? The cloning will just happen in the background?

   • Embed this notice
     silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 07:15:45 JST silverpill

     in reply to

     @feralthoughts Yes, conversation containers can be used to enforce conversation scope.

     Say user B replies followers-only to the OP. User C then replies followers-only to B’s post. In this case, B’s post will only be visible to B’s followers, while C’s post will only be visible to C’s followers, with further downstream replies inheriting the problem.

     This is not a narrowing, it's a change of scope. Narrowing means user C can only reply to B's followers or to B directly.

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 07:15:46 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill

     @silverpill

     To address this problem, it may be worth applying conversation containers also to public conversations? And applying them so that all replies inherit the privacy status of the OP?

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 07:15:47 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill

     @silverpill

     Thank you for all the responses.

     Personally, I think the Streams/Forte behaviour, of every single reply inheriting the OP’s privacy status, is the one that matches social expectations.

     If the OP is starting a conversation, they should get to decide the contours for the entire thread, a respondent should not be able to change those. If some respondent wants to respond with a different privacy status, they can always start a new conversation and link to the OP.

     (continues)

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Wednesday, 22-Oct-2025 07:15:47 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill

     @silverpill

     Also: allowing respondents to narrow the visibility will run into the well-known problem of each reply being visible to a different set of followers.

     Say user B replies followers-only to the OP. User C then replies followers-only to B’s post. In this case, B’s post will only be visible to B’s followers, while C’s post will only be visible to C’s followers, with further downstream replies inheriting the problem.

     (continues)

   • Embed this notice
     silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Thursday, 23-Oct-2025 02:11:55 JST silverpill

     in reply to

     • Jupiter Rowland

     @feralthoughts This problem has an easy solution. Mentions don't have to be inserted into posts, they can simply be copied from the parent post.

     Some platforms always used implicit addressing. I plan to do this too in the future (Mitra already uses implicit addressing in some cases, e.g. in group conversations).

     @jupiter_rowland

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Thursday, 23-Oct-2025 02:11:56 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill
     • Jupiter Rowland

     @silverpill

     So... some posters randomly start deleting the @ mentions of one or two or three or more recipients, leading to fragmented sub-threads and sub-sub-threads with random subsets of participants.

     This is very counter-productive; it prevents inclusive, participatory conversations.

     @jupiter_rowland

     (continues)

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Thursday, 23-Oct-2025 02:11:56 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill
     • Jupiter Rowland

     @silverpill

     If all participants in a thread received notifications even without @ mentions, this problem would not occur. In that case, @ mentions will only be required for adding new participants. Once added, they too should automatically receive all subsequent posts in the thread, without anyone having to @ mention them.

     If some participant doesn’t want those notifications, they should have the option to unsubscribe from the thread.

     @jupiter_rowland

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Thursday, 23-Oct-2025 02:11:57 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill
     • Jupiter Rowland

     @silverpill

     One reason I have been asking about notifications without @ mentions: today, if lot of users join a conversation, then the @ mentions can take up 100-200 or more characters, and significantly reduce the characters available for the actual text (I know Mitra has ten times Mastodon’s character limit, but even then...). In addition, a poster may allot characters for hashtags and groups. That leaves even fewer characters for the actual text.

     @jupiter_rowland

     (continues)

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Thursday, 23-Oct-2025 02:11:58 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill
     • Jupiter Rowland

     @silverpill

     Regarding notifications: I am not sure, but I think a Hubzilla OP starting a thread receives notifications of every single reply, including those that do not tag the OP. And I am far less certain here, but maybe the behaviour is similar in case of a Hubzilla user participating in a thread started by someone else?

     But I could be wrong. Maybe we should ask some Hubzilla veteran. @jupiter_rowland , can you please tell us how this works on Hubzilla?

     (continues)

   • Embed this notice
     silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Thursday, 23-Oct-2025 02:58:40 JST silverpill

     in reply to

     @feralthoughts

     I feel restricting all replies to OP's privacy level will prevent many possible pathologies.

     But it introduces a new pathology: people who use platforms not supporting conversation containers may be not aware of the fact that their comment visibility setting will be ignored. They reply with a DM, but conversation owner forces it to be public.

     So I think narrowing should be allowed.

     I am not sure about the OP. Maybe OP should never be excluded.

     Either way, in future, do you plan to apply conversation containers to public conversations?

     Yes.

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Thursday, 23-Oct-2025 02:58:41 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill

     @silverpill

     Hmm - ok.

     So... if OP is not a follower of B, and B's follower-only reply to OP's public post does not tag OP, then OP won't receive B's reply? Or if B does tag OP, but C's reply to B's post doesn't tag OP, then OP won't receive C's reply? Seems undesirable, if that would be the case.

     I feel restricting all replies to OP's privacy level will prevent many possible pathologies.

     Either way, in future, do you plan to apply conversation containers to public conversations?

   • Embed this notice
     silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Thursday, 23-Oct-2025 11:47:02 JST silverpill

     in reply to

     @feralthoughts Yes, it will be made simpler but maybe it will not look like Hubzilla.

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Thursday, 23-Oct-2025 11:47:03 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill

     @silverpill

     Still have few doubts, but they don't matter.

     For the average fedizen, the present design of Mitra's nomadic identity seems very difficult to use.

     Are there future plans to make Mitra's nomadic identity design similar to Forte's? Or maybe simpler than that?

     (I have never used Forte, but I am assuming that its nomadic identity design is similar to Hubzilla's, which I know can be activated from the regular web interface.)

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Friday, 24-Oct-2025 02:11:18 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill
     • Jupiter Rowland

     @silverpill

     If I understood correctly, conversation containers ensure that all replies in a thread are routed through the OP’s server on their way to other participants in a conversation. So once conversation containers for public conversations are implemented, it should be possible for at least a Mitra OP to get notified of every single reply in a thread, even if they are not tagged. Isn’t that correct?

     @jupiter_rowland

   • Embed this notice
     silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Friday, 24-Oct-2025 02:11:18 JST silverpill

     in reply to

     • Jupiter Rowland

     Even mentions copied from the parent will count as characters, and eat up the limited character quota, no?

     No, they can be be omitted from the text.

     In this comment I will not make an explicit mention, but the message will still be delivered to you.

     So once conversation containers for public conversations are implemented, it should be possible for at least a Mitra OP to get notified of every single reply in a thread, even if they are not tagged. Isn’t that correct?

     Yes, that is correct.

     By the way, I didn’t get the point you had made earlier:

     Addressing in ActivityPub is similar to that of E-mail. A message contains a list of recipients and your server delivers a copy of the message to each recipient.

     @-mentions, addressing and notifications are different things.

     @-mentions are often used to determine recipients, but this is not a requirement. Similarly, applications often generate a notification when you are mentioned, but they may also generate a notification if you're addressed without @-mention.

     @jupiter_rowland

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Friday, 24-Oct-2025 02:11:19 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill
     • Jupiter Rowland

     @silverpill

     By the way, I didn’t get the point you had made earlier:

     > You're notified only when you're directly addressed ... I think the way notifications work will be the same when we switch to containers

     @jupiter_rowland

     (continues)

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Friday, 24-Oct-2025 02:11:20 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill
     • Jupiter Rowland

     @silverpill

     Even mentions copied from the parent will count as characters, and eat up the limited character quota, no?

     @jupiter_rowland

     (continues)

   • Embed this notice
     silverpill (silverpill@mitra.social)'s status on Friday, 24-Oct-2025 04:51:39 JST silverpill

     in reply to

     • Jupiter Rowland

     @feralthoughts

     Irrespective of @ mentions, Mitra will always notify a user if that user is addressed in a post - would that be a correct statement?

     Yes.

     And a Mitra user's reply post will include implicit addressing (in future?) copied from parent post, so the user is free to delete the recipient list from the text of the message - correct?

     Yes

     But if the @ mentions are missing, the recipient application (Mastodon or whatever else) may or may not notify the recipients, depending on their own design – right?

     Mention tags will still be added to ActivityPub object so Mastodon notifications will keep working.

     @jupiter_rowland

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Friday, 24-Oct-2025 04:51:40 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill
     • Jupiter Rowland

     @silverpill

     Thank you for the explanations.

     So...

     Irrespective of @ mentions, Mitra will always notify a user if that user is addressed in a post - would that be a correct statement?

     And Mitra's threading routine depends only on the sender and the recipient addresses in the posts in a conversation, not at all on @ mentions in those posts?

     @jupiter_rowland

     (continues)

   • Embed this notice
     Feral Thoughts (feralthoughts@union.place)'s status on Friday, 24-Oct-2025 04:51:40 JST Feral Thoughts

     in reply to

     • silverpill
     • Jupiter Rowland

     @silverpill

     And a Mitra user's reply post will include implicit addressing (in future?) copied from parent post, so the user is free to delete the recipient list from the text of the message - correct? But if the @ mentions are missing, the recipient application (Mastodon or whatever else) may or may not notify the recipients, depending on their own design – right?

     @jupiter_rowland