Ping @angus, thought it might be useful to you to read the experiences of a bunch of fediverse newbies with a Discourse instance, trying to get their heads around how to use the AP federation features;
There may be a few specific things you can address, like whether posts deleted on a fediverse server are supposed to persist on a Discourse forum hosting the thread they were part of. Or whether or not Followers-Only replies to topics federated from a Discourse forum can be publicly displayed on that forum. If those are not expected behaviour, they may have found bugs.
It may be that post deletes and recognising posting scopes are features that haven't been implemented yet, in which case I'd suggest making them a high priority. There's a subset of the fediverse community who can be very prickly towards devs they perceive as failing to prioritise privacy and consent. They can even get agitated about public posts appearing outside the fediverse (as they understand its boundaries). See the flack BridgyFed's fediverse<>ATmosphere bridge got ,over being opt-out, rather than opt-in on both ends.
Anyway, thanks for the ongoing work to bring Discourse into the fediverse. Hope you enjoy interacting with the cool folks working on bringing more music hosting platforms into the fediverse, in an artist-centric way : )
AFAIK in Mastodon deleted messages don’t be deleted in Discourse. Deletion is restricted action in Discourse. And Discourse isn’t a Mastodon instance. Discourse is using ActivityPub. Different thing.
And every Mastodon user knows, or should know, that deletion is very unreliable. It spreads thru Fediverse or not.
Forum is forum and ActivityPub (practically only Mastodon from Discourse point of view) is its own thing.
By Followers-Only you mean ”Publish Post #1 and deliver it to the followers of the Group Actors” (or normally after 5 mins) for OP? Answer for such topic isn’t going to followers, into global public timeline. It is just matter of which timeline someone sees messages.
It just means it is subscribed feed as normally in Mastodon. Nothing secret.
When someone answers (which happens really rarely because of group actors and how they boosts, but so it works nowadays) to a topic from Mastodon, it is a public message in that forum and in Mastodon, as usual. And if someone from forum answers to that comment, not into topic (thing, that forum users don’t realize) mentioning that Mastodon user, that post is totally public and be federated just normally.
Or did I totally misunderstand your question?
This is different thing and worth of its own topic, but my opinion is that nothing should do or happen just because of some subset wants something, that is beyong normal limit, or they are using theirs own definition. Meaning that nothing above isn’t matter of consent or privacy.
Ter context; @Jagster maakt geen deel uit van het Discourse-ontwikkelteam volgens hun profiel op meta.discourse, waar dit commentaar vandaan komt. @jdp23 kan misschien beter dan ik uitleggen waarom dit T&V-kwesties zijn voor fediverse-gemeenschappen.
Jagster:
Het is meteen zichtbaar in het profiel.
Ik heb dit onderwerp geplaatst in de categorie socialhub.activitypub.rocks voor Discourse, dat gefedereerd is met het forum dat je aan het lezen bent. Wanneer ik hier op je profiel klik, staat er;
Deze gebruiker is niet langer actief.
Dus nee, het is niet meteen voor iedereen zichtbaar.
Jagster:
Waarom denk je dat dat op de een of andere manier belangrijk is?
Dit is voornamelijk een ontwikkelaarsforum en mijn bericht was gericht aan de ActivityPub plugin-ontwikkelaar met naam. Aangezien jij hebt geantwoord, zou het voor anderen hier gemakkelijk zijn om aan te nemen dat je een ontwikkelaar bent. Ik probeer die verwarring gewoon te voorkomen.
This is a confusing topic indeed! I am not yet very familiar with ActivityPub but as the new community manager of meta.discourse.org it appears I need to learn! Let me try to do that here.
We unlisted this topic here on meta.discourse.org because there appears to be a bug of some sort, not allowing the first post to be edited. That we think is related to ActivityPub and we’ve asked @angus to check into it. Let’s wait a bit to see how that gets resolved and then we can see what we want to do with this topic here on meta.discourse.org.
@jagster I appreciate your trying to help out here but please take a more polite tone with a person who is not even a member of meta.discourse.org and might not know how things work here. Likewise @strypey1 please be patient with Jagster who is a knowledgeable Discourse user who is just trying to be helpful and wants to help make Discourse better.
@jagster is a member of meta.discourse.org but not a member of socialhub.activitypub.rocks. Meanwhile @strypey1 is a member of socialhub.activitypub.rocks but not a member of meta.discourse.org. So it’s understandable that some confusion may arise.
But I’m and was very pollite, but I don’t do now or never small talk. And if you take another look my tone was totally same than OP’s — with one detail: I answered to OP totally normal way.
I changed my tone only after when my position came to topic and the expectation was I should not comment because mentions and because I’m not a member of the team (especially when we are in dev-forum…). But even then my tone was pollite.
But this meta is off topic.
And yet I’m the only one who actually answered, even OP didn`t accept it
Bedankt voor je hulp @tobiaseigen1. Dit is een goede leerervaring voor de contextuele verwarring die kan ontstaan bij het gebruik van forumfederatie. Misschien iets om te overwegen in een toekomstige UX-review?
Misschien zouden er sterkere visuele indicatoren kunnen zijn voor wanneer een onderwerp of opmerking is gefedereerd vanuit een ander forum. Het zou zeker helpen als klikken op de avatar van een externe actor zou aangeven dat ze zich op een ander forum bevinden, in plaats van "Deze gebruiker is niet langer actief".
@jagster Mijn excuses voor enig ongemak. Het doel van mijn eerste opmerking was niet om jouw mening te negeren, maar om context toe te voegen ten behoeve van iedereen die het op SocialHub ziet. Ik weet zeker dat je daar op Meta goed bekend bent :)
It is intentional that posts from other forums cannot be edited by folks on this (i.e. a different) forum. That is normal in ActivityPub (e.g. an admin of one Mastodon instance can’t edit posts from another Mastodon instance). There’s basic principles of ownership and control at work here. Admins on meta are not admins everywhere. By default, edits to an activitypub post are federated everywhere.
Danyl, thanks for the feedback. We’ll think on it some more and incorporate it into upcoming work. We’re also already discussing the confusion that arose from this topic and will likely be making some more documentation and support content as a result soon
Thanks, Angus! That all makes sense now. There is no bug in the fact that admins here on meta.discourse.org can’t edit the posts from other forums. I’ve listed this topic again.
How do you “claim” the user associated with the actor from another site? I created an account on socialhub but my username was not available. So now I’m tobiaseigen1 there which is sad.
Ik ben verward door de vraag. Maar toen was u waarschijnlijk even verward door de mijne, omdat ik er niet over had nagedacht welke forumadminactie nodig was toen ik hem stelde. Ter verduidelijking;
Dit is hier mijn account, die via Meta binnenkomt als “Strypey1”. Omdat ik al een account heb op Meta, ingesteld om AP-federatie te pitchen aan de Discourse-ontwikkelaars met @aschrijver. @tobiaseigen voegt Strypey en Strypey1 daar samen (bedankt Tobias!), dus voor zover ik weet wordt alles opgelost. Bedankt voor het controleren.
So what is the plan for this topic? It does not feel like a support topic but is in the support category on meta.discourse.org. Is there anything in particular remaining to be done here now that we've all learned how activitypub works between meta.discourse.org and socialhub? Maybe we move it to the community category, where we talk about community management?
I'm heading out on leave today for a couple weeks, and when I get back I will talk with colleagues and meta.discourse.org members about how we want to use activitypub on meta going forward. I will also try to set up activitypub on some of my personal sites so I can learn more about how it works in practice and understand the feedback about how it might be improved.
It's a pretty neat feature and I am super impressed by what folks are doing with federation across lots of different platforms of which Discourse is just one! But there are some confusing aspects that this topic illustrates, like how do members of a site know and understand what is happening when they participate in a topic that is federated. We have to find a way to communicate this directly in the interface in a way that makes sense to anybody using it. It will be hard.
strypey:
Let me know what it was you wanted to edit, and I’ll see if I can do it as the OP.
Thanks but there was nothing to edit. A moderator on meta.discourse.org just thought it was odd that it could not be edited and thought it was a bug. It also read like it was not intended to be public in the support category. Turns out that was because it was federated from socialhub which our moderators aren't all familiar with.
strypey:
can you merge my account here with my account on Meta too?
Let me try to do that here.
