-
Visit
t/356997/4. -
Invoke the avatar.
-
-
Note that the username is incorrect, too. The original account is merelysocialhub.activitypub.rocks/u/rokejulianlockhart. -
Because it’s not linked. [1] Should have been a separate thread, anyway.
-
AI-generated summary
The discussion revolves around the issue of federated users being considered “inactive” on Discourse. rokejulianlockhart initiated the conversation, pointing out the inconsistency and suggesting that instead of “inactive,” federated users should be labeled as such. Jagster responded that this is by design, as Discourse treats federated users differently than native users. Jagster further explained that Discourse doesn’t consider federated users as “active users” in the same way it does with native users, and that this is not a bug, but rather a #feature request. rokejulianlockhart ultimately agreed to switch the issue to a #feature request, acknowledging Jagster’s deeper understanding of Discourse’s internals.
That is discussed quite often, but it is by design.
@Jagster, the user isn’t inactive, though. Why not merely state that they’re federated?
Because Discourse users aren’t active users in the meaning they would be actual actors. Categories and tags are. And yes, that is a huge issue, and no, AFAIK, this is not a bug, but a Contribute > Feature request, because it would change how Discourse works with AP.
Pure guess, but nowadays system makes possible how Discourse/Discourse works and it has been more important than how Discourse is federating to Mastodon direction. Discourse doesn’t understand Friendica either, or Pixelfed (well that one would be difficult, because content is so different and Discourse can’t federate images).
@Jagster, I don’t understand, but you’ve evidently a better comprehension of Discourse’s internals than I, so I’ll switch it to Contribute > Feature. Thanks.
