Notices by Bruce Elrick (virtuous_sloth@cosocial.ca)

@evan Given that its big strength is that many disparate servers can be each managed with its own social media policies, the idea of an archive of the 'fediverse' seems incongruous, since it isn't core to the mission.

So I'm a no, but archiving your personal posts (and all replies?), or a particular server having archiving turned on.

@evan and I cannot lie

@mpjgregoire
Hmmm. Are you talking about what if a small number of new assembly members do not swear? If those members' votes don't count, then I wonder if the vote should devolve to the remainder?

I'm not sure of the logistics of what you are talking about.

@evan I was fortunate enough to have moved to Winnipeg in 1978 with my family and got to experience the total eclipse of 1979. Kids at school had to stay indoors watching a TV covering the event, but your parents could give permission to stay home so my dad did.

The sky was perfectly clear. It was amazing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_eclipse_of_February_26%2C_1979

@evan Apparently cosocial.can has nothing for that hash tag, so I have no context.

@evan @cwebber
Now that you mention it, it occurs to me now that I recall, in Christine's doc, the pet name being transmitted to a third party when sharing a contact. If I'm remembering correctly. I'll have to re-read.

@evan My assumption would be that the nickname only appears in the user interface of the person assigning the nickname. That would be stored on their server, which means an admin could snoop it if they were not hosting their own personal instance.

In that case, it sounds a lot like the note you can make for someone you follow. Having it there to memorialize the circumstances in which you decided to follow is really useful.

I do not see this as a consent issue at all.

@evan
I, for one, welcome our new social network star overlords.

@evan Yes, but Oi!

@evan Ginger beef? Not sure it's a signature, but it was invented here in Calgary.

@evan @maj The clock on or humour is ticking away!

@evan @maj
I chose 57. I turn 58 on Thursday. Ironic?

@evan @mattblaze
I wonder if the sheer number of decisions ends up hiding what functionally ends up being less actually agency, mostly in terms of a lack of diversity in the choice options.

@mattblaze
Do you have a list of all the things Americans vote on?

Here in Alberta, Canada, we have:
1) federal elections: candidates for Member of Parliament of Canada
2) provincial elections: candidates for Member of the Legislative Assembly or Parliament of a province
3) municipal elections: city councils (not sure what the rural equivalent is), mayors (usually the weak kind that are functionally counsellors at large), & school board trustees
4) occasional referenda

@evan Yes.

It is important to normalize that mistakes are human and that the proper response to a mistake is to learn and adjust oneself or, more importantly, to learn and adjust the surrounding system that did not mitigate the bad impact of the mistake.

The worst response to a mistake is to be embarrassed and cover it up and, moreso, to heap scorn on someone who has made a mistake.

Of course, covering up a mistake is itself a mistake.

@evan There are many, especially on our instance! I'll have to think about making lists. And checking them twice.

@evan Yes, but not all.

@evan
"Key concepts in IP multicast include an IP multicast group address,[2] a multicast distribution tree, and receiver-driven tree creation.[3]"

My impression is that the setup time for this is justified with streaming (a live video or audio multicast) but my gut is telling me it wouldn't be efficient for per-message attachment distribution.

Then I think you use it not per message but long-term server-to-server message distribution groups, but don't understand how you handle retransmission

@evan No, that's only a requirement of GoFundThem, not of GoFundMe.

;-)

@evan
Not unrelated but I did like the mechanism Google+ used.

Each of your friends could be put into multiple "circles" and circles could contain circles and any post could be published to any circle. There was not direct evidence of your circle names and the indirect evidence was simply who might reply.

Beyond that, you could control visibility of the post and replies to friends (in the post's circle) or friends of friends (all friends of friends in the post's circle).

Something like that.