I think you're right

@Kichae said in Organizing the many worlds you're part of through NodeBB: > But man, do I ever desperately want the bulletin board experience in /world. It really feels like what the fediverse was always meant to be, to me. I've been inspired by some teaser images from @johnonolan@mastodon.xyz's Ghost blog, which physically segregates microblogging content apart from long-form content (e.g. blogs). Forum topics fit somewhere in the middle, although since title and body are present we tend to align more with long-form content. It's a really neat idea I'd like to play around with more.

@liaizon@social.wake.st @computersandblues@post.lurk.org that particular forum is not hosted by us, so we don't have any contact for them

@AltCode One significant potential issues with listing all followed categories in the same kind of layout as /categories is the below-the-fold effect, or the page-2 effect as one might have called it in earlier times. Whatever categories end up falling below a certain scroll distance will just never been seen by most users. If you follow a lot of categories, the ones that end up closer to the bottom of the list than the top will just end up ignored. It doesn't encourage participation, and it also doesn't discourage following a lot of categories that you don't actually care about. And follow relationships are very important under ActivityPub, since they dictate content flow. Bringing in a lot of remote content that no one on the local forum is actually reading or engaging with is very wasteful. An easily accessible compact list might be better, with different sorting options so that users can choose to have categories with new content float to the top. Usually with forum categories, you want the ordering to be static, but that expectation won't necessarily be there for just a list.

My first experience with Federation was with Calckey, (fork of Miskey.) I liked some things about it, but there were forks of forks and I never knew in the end which variant of it was best to use

@inthehands@hachyderm.io considering that insurance companies are likely one of the more data driven companies out there, I like to think that insurance rates for Teslas have already been "adjusted" upward. Software glitches, chemical fires, doors that don't open during power failure, self-driving shenanigans, the list goes on.

I asked in that issue whether Lemmy finds community via to/cc (it does). Does PieFed do the same? Yes - PieFed does the same. It looks in 'audience', then 'cc', then 'to'. It has to, to support all the platforms that haven't adopted 'audience. It's a convenient field, but PieFed won't be affected if Lemmy goes through with removing it. Would this also open up the possibility of a topic/context being part of multiple audiences/communities? Not at present. If you do something like cc: [community1, community2] it will only go to community1 (on both Lemmy and PieFed). There's so many activities that are effectively duplicates, both in normal operation and when platforms are bugged (both Lemmy and Mastodon have gone through phases of sending the same activity multiple times), that you need a way to make sure you're only processing one. On PieFed, this is done by having a UNIQUE constraint of the 'ap_id' column of the Post table (the ap_id of your post is https://community.nodebb.org/post/103806), so it means you can't have the same post in more than one community.

Just wanna add to this convo that we've been working with interaction policies in GoToSocial for a while now, and the protocol extension described here is extensible to include a canQuote property on an interaction policy: https://docs.gotosocial.org/en/latest/federation/interaction_policy/Reply, Like, and Announce controls and approvals etc are already running in GoToSocial since v0.17.0 last year. It would be pretty neato if Mastodon could reuse the interaction policy properties and approval flow for quote posts, insofar as that's possible. Have discussed this in the Mastodon discord with Claire as well, but just putting it here too.

Yea, odd, I made a second account on mysite and that follows and unfollows normally. So its a mystery why my first Admin account is doing it differently. Maybe one day we will figure out whats altering the behaviour

That sounds good

@JollyRoberts You can define a new property in https://w3id.org/fep namespace (see FEP-888d), along with the Feed type.I think this is better than attributing actor to a collection, which is very unusual (though I don't expect that to cause any interop issues). Another option is to use an array value for attributedTo, this is also uncommon but some implementations do this (If I remember correctly, PeerTube is one of them).@protocol

Interested in something for Mastodon & Pixelfed but probably many fed clients, around multi dimensional measures of expertise and reputation, so if someone's a professional (or popular) photographer, or a climate scientist, or a fisherman or artist or videographer, they grow their reputation from recommendations in that specialism. A good scientist may be an awful chef.My initial thought was from using Pixelfed, where there is a spectrum of photos from poor happy snaps to truly great photos. I thought it would be good if people could, if they chose to, opt into get constructive advice on say, taking a better photo. Asking/allowing others with good reputations would be better and more effective than the blind leading the blind. I thought the multi dimensional reputation idea would avoid the single measure problem of the great scientist pontificating on how to best cook an omelette.It could be over complex if not thought through but it could also be very helpful. I'd love to discuss with the community. I'm a UX/UI designer, not a coder.(Also, this is my first post here)

@johnonolan@mastodon.xyz no worries, and thanks! Will do.

Im not familiar with the specs, for now Im only implementing basic OAuth (and only the part where users can login to Ibis with an account from another website). I didnt know about Openwebauth, maybe that could be supported at some point in the future.