Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   hypolite (hypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 02:35:47 JST hypolite
   The #Diaspora project is what it is, but I really like the Diaspora protocol separation between authorship and ownership. In this model, the original poster is the rightful owner of all the replies that gets published in the thread they started. They are responsible with distributing replies to the original recipients, whether they follow each other or not, and can even delete replies as they see fit, and the deletion is propagated as well.
   
   This avoids the current #Mastodon behavior where in a Follower-only conversation, each individual recipient may only see the original poster's replies to other people which own replies they didn't receive because they aren't following them.
   
   With #ActivityPub, is there a way out of this half-private message, half-group conversation situation where only the original poster has a comprehensive view of limited privacy threads?
   
   I wanted to publish a personal posts to my mutuals only which #Friendica allows, but I realized that any reply to it might not be visible from the other thread recipients, which means my own subsequent replies would be confusing for anyone's not directly following the person I'd reply to. And this has prevented me from actually writing my post.
   • Embed this notice
     hypolite (hypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 02:43:20 JST hypolite

     in reply to

     • Hal
     @zzz You can't delete other people's posts in Mastodon that I know of. If an author deletes their own post, then its deletion will be propagated to all their followers, but that's about it.
   • Embed this notice
     Hal (zzz@eldritch.cafe)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 02:43:21 JST Hal

     in reply to

     @hypolite

     How does Mastodon see the deletions? Does it just ignore the request?

   • Embed this notice
     hypolite (hypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 02:48:32 JST hypolite

     in reply to

     • Hal
     @zzz Diaspora and Mastodon aren't compatible at the moment as neither of them currently supports the other one's protocol (Diaspora for Diaspora, ActivityPub for Mastodon).
   • Embed this notice
     Hal (zzz@eldritch.cafe)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 02:48:33 JST Hal

     in reply to

     @hypolite

     Oh no I meant. If you make a thread on Diaspora, someone from Mastodon replies, and you try to delete that reply ... what happens? What do you as the thread creator on Diaspora see? What does the person on Mastodon see?

   • Embed this notice
     hypolite (hypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 03:03:02 JST hypolite

     in reply to

     • Dr. Quadragon ❌
     @drq I don't believe this is something we should wish for. Diaspora has some very opinionated behaviors like the one I mentioned, and in Friendica we're struggling with supporting both protocols in a seamless manner, even beyond the "Mastodon followers can't see Diaspora replies and vice-versa".
   • Embed this notice
     Dr. Quadragon ❌ (drq@mastodon.ml)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 03:03:03 JST Dr. Quadragon ❌

     in reply to

     • Hal

     @hypolite Diaspora Activitypub when. I mean, we can't have this fragmentation.

     @zzz

   • Embed this notice
     hypolite (hypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 03:20:49 JST hypolite

     in reply to

     • Hal
     @zzz It might, depending on what the protocol allows. If there's no possible separation between authorship and ownership in ActivityPub, then you will not be able to cryptographically sign a deletion message for a post you didn't write yourself, and as a result remote servers should reject any such attempt.
   • Embed this notice
     Hal (zzz@eldritch.cafe)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 03:20:50 JST Hal

     in reply to

     • Dr. Quadragon ❌

     @hypolite @drq

     I just want in Mastodon the ability to disable and delete replies to posts. Is that so much to ask?

   • Embed this notice
     mike (mike@macgirvin.com)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 06:29:12 JST mike

     in reply to
     Instead of a group owner relaying/deleting a post/comment to their group, what they can do instead is create activities to add or remove it from their inbox collection (or a collection devoted to a conversation), which accomplishes the same thing. This is entirely legal, even with Mastodon's interpretation of the relevant specs.
     hypolite likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     hypolite (hypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 06:32:27 JST hypolite

     in reply to

     • heluecht
     • mike
     @mike Thank you for the concise and helpful reply, unfortunately this is already above my pay grade and I would have to defer to @heluecht for the actual implementation.
   • Embed this notice
     Hal (zzz@eldritch.cafe)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 06:37:16 JST Hal

     in reply to

     • wakest ⁂

     @liaizon @hypolite

     Yes but the discussion went nowhere https://github.com/w3c/activitypub/issues/319

     hypolite likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     wakest ⁂ (liaizon@social.wake.st)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 06:37:17 JST wakest ⁂

     in reply to

     • Hal

     @hypolite @zzz this is something we *really* need to work on, on the AP spec side. I wonder if anyone has attempted a FEP draft yet with proposals to fix this at the AP level

   • Embed this notice
     hypolite (hypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 21:38:28 JST hypolite

     in reply to

     • Liwott
     @liwott Why not? When you leave a reply on a conversation, you involve the original poster in a way you don't when you start a conversation yourself.
     
     This is also a way to decentralize moderation even further. No need to file a moderation report about a reply on your own posts violating your server's rules or even your own sensibility. It further empower users and encourages to curate follows as well.
   • Embed this notice
     Liwott (liwott@nerdica.net)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 21:38:30 JST Liwott

     in reply to
     @hypolite
     I don't thiink it is desirable that the original poster have any kind of ownership right to someone else's posts. Imho, all the should be able to do is decoupling the comment (and it's subtree) from their thread
   • Embed this notice
     heluecht (heluecht@pirati.ca)'s status on Sunday, 27-Nov-2022 22:05:29 JST heluecht

     in reply to
     @hypolite I haven't looked at all posts in this thread, so this might be said somewhere: We are transmitting our posts with LD signatures and the thread starter always relays all incoming posts. Posts with LD signatures can be checked without the need for a valid HTTP signature. So at least amongst Friendica users this shouldn't be a problem. And since we also support signed HTTP requests, other system that don't support LD signatures could perform a signed request to check the validity of the relayed post.
     hypolite likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     hypolite (hypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com)'s status on Monday, 28-Nov-2022 21:57:25 JST hypolite

     in reply to

     • Liwott
     @liwott
     The comment is itself a creation. Just because the owner does not think it fits their conversation does not mean the author has to lose their production or the ability to show it to their own followers.
     This is very debatable. Having a comment deleted doesn't mean an author loses the ability to publish to their followers. Just not with a reply on someone else's post.
     
     Mastodon has a very opinionated approach to this by not allowing quoting posts in top-level publications, favoring direct replies, but not making the original author responsible for replies distribution either, which favors public posts.
     
     Diaspora is the complete opposite, where direct boosts aren't allowed, other people's posts must be quoted in a new post, even if there's no additional content, and top-level authors have complete responsibility over the ensuing conversations. This favors limited-visibility publication scope and reacting to posts by quoting them in a new thread where you can have complete moderation control.
     
     Your idea would be in-between those extremes.
   • Embed this notice
     Liwott (liwott@nerdica.net)'s status on Monday, 28-Nov-2022 21:57:26 JST Liwott

     in reply to
     @hypolite
     The comment is itself a creation. Just because the owner does not think it fits their conversation does not mean the author has to lose their production or the ability to show it to their own followers.
     
     However, I agree that it is better that the owner be responsible with distributing replies to the original recipients and that they be able to exclude a subtree from this procedure. But in that case I think the comment should be turned into a quote-share and normally distributed to its author's followers rather than deleted.